|
Here are two pictures that illustrate my problem. It's not so much a problem really to be honest. In the book I just saw some nice examples of portraits where the background was heavily blurred until you could hardly make out what it was. Like here. But if I got that close I wouldn't be able to get much of a portrait. This would be a better distance (I'm about 40-50cm from the flowers) but as you can't see there isn't much blurring of the background. And there I tried to blur it as much as possible. But I'm not zoomed in in either of those. Or maybe I am (checking the stats makes it seem like it). |
very newbie question • Page 2
-
Tonka 31,980 posts
Seen 20 hours ago
Registered 18 years ago -
Tonka 31,980 posts
Seen 20 hours ago
Registered 18 years agoI had a look in the book last night and it said that "fixed lense" cameras do the f stops difefrently than SLRs. This might be because it's an oldish book. He said 2.8f on a fixed lense equates to 11f on an SLR. He never really explained why though. -
There's no way that a compact that gives you all that control will sell you a lens that it calls f/2.8 that actually produces an image that an SLR would produce at f/11. I think that's either out of date or there's something else going on there. Ignore it!
I don't understand what the first picture demonstrates as none of it is in focus! Or are you saying you want the background to blur like that whole photo has?
As for the second photo, Flickr says that's 5mm but further down confirms that the 35mm equivalent is 24mm so you're as wide as you can be on that camera, effectively completely hiding the depth of field effect.
To get the flowers in focus and the background soft in this situation, you need to back away from the subject and zoom in, keeping the aperture as wide as possible (wide aperture = low number = shallow depth of field = soft background) -
Tonka 31,980 posts
Seen 20 hours ago
Registered 18 years agoI also found it very strange, especially since he didn't go into any details as to why 2.8f was 11f. He just said that that's how it is.
It might also have gone over my head. -
It doesn't make any sense at all to me - there's a vast difference between f/11 and f/2.8. -
terminalterror 18,932 posts
Seen 2 weeks ago
Registered 20 years agoTonka wrote:
I had a look in the book last night and it said that "fixed lense" cameras do the f stops difefrently than SLRs. This might be because it's an oldish book. He said 2.8f on a fixed lense equates to 11f on an SLR. He never really explained why though.
This is correct*, but only when applied to depth of field. The difference is due to the smaller sensor on the compact vs a DSLR.
The bigger the sensor, the shallower the depth of field.
That is why most compacts only offer f/2.8 to f/8, as the latter is more than enough to have everything in sharp focus.
It is also why compacts are very good for handheld macro photography, where a large depth of field can be desirable, but on a DSLR you have to stop down so much you need a tripod and a longer exposure.
*I'm not sure of the exact relationship, and it all depends on the exact ratio of sensor sizes, which vary on compacts as well as on DSLRs (where you have full frame, APS-C and 4:3rds) -
Jos 712 posts
Seen 1 week ago
Registered 20 years agoMassively simplifying;
Compacts have small sensors, this means they use short focal lengths (hence the equivilent bit in the marketing - equivilent to the result given by a 35mm film camera). Also the f-numbers on your camera are equivilent too. So the aperture is smaller then you might realise.
Short focal lengths and wide apertures give large depth of field.
Therefore, harder to get blurry backgrounds on compacts.
Other factors play a part but for compacts this is the biggy.
See [link=http://www.megapixel.net/html/articles/article-dof.php">here or -
neilch 749 posts
Seen 1 day ago
Registered 16 years agoSlightly off topic, but I've got a friend who gets around the limitations of her P&S compact not having manual aperture settings by setting it to macro mode - this seems to go for lower aperture settings -
Ginger 7,256 posts
Seen 2 weeks ago
Registered 19 years agoneilch wrote:
Our canon ixus something or other has a night mode which allows you to piss around with long exposure - it's actually quite capable but you have to fight it to stop it from using a high ISO as well
Slightly off topic, but I've got a friend who gets around the limitations of her P&S compact not having manual aperture settings by setting it to macro mode - this seems to go for lower aperture settings -
keyboardmonkey 409 posts
Seen 10 years ago
Registered 15 years agoAnother newbie question.
How do you guys remember all the right settings for the camera when you want to get a particular effect?
Is it a case of doing a particular photo project over and over again (for instance the BBC Photography Masterclasses) or a case of totally understanding all about aperture, focus, lighting etc... and then putting it all together?
I'm asking as my random messing around with the camera settings sometimes produces good photos (but i'm never able to remember what setting i had and replicate them again).
Sorry if this has been asked a billion times before. -
henro_ben 2,393 posts
Seen 21 hours ago
Registered 15 years agokeyboardmonkey wrote:
Another newbie question.
How do you guys remember all the right settings for the camera when you want to get a particular effect?
...or a case of totally understanding all about aperture, focus, lighting etc... and then putting it all together?
This. But you tend to get this knowledge by:
...doing a particular photo project over and over again (for instance the BBC Photography Masterclasses)
...this! -
ram 3,598 posts
Seen 3 years ago
Registered 16 years agokeyboardmonkey wrote:
Another newbie question.
How do you guys remember all the right settings for the camera when you want to get a particular effect?
Is it a case of doing a particular photo project over and over again (for instance the BBC Photography Masterclasses) or a case of totally understanding all about aperture, focus, lighting etc... and then putting it all together?
I'm asking as my random messing around with the camera settings sometimes produces good photos (but i'm never able to remember what setting i had and replicate them again).
Sorry if this has been asked a billion times before.
Depending what software you use the photos should have the camera settings built into the image data. So you can see what you did at the time. e.g. Adobe Bridge tells all, ISO, Aperture, focal length etc. -
Yeah - just keep taking lots and lots of photos, review them, understand how you got the results you got, and learn what to do and what not to do, until it becomes second nature. Same as any skill really. -
Just to add, rather than messing about with camera settings (whatever that means), stick your camera on fully manual. There's no better (or quicker) way to learn the skills involved. One finger on aperture, one finger on shutter speed, keep your eye on the metre (in the viewfinder), and shoot. -
keyboardmonkey 409 posts
Seen 10 years ago
Registered 15 years agoGents thanks for the answers.. looks like i need to do a few 'photo projects' and see what results I get, and to keep on practising. -
Nth 3,164 posts
Seen 9 hours ago
Registered 12 years agoAperture Priority mode is the best starting point imho. -
mal 29,326 posts
Seen 4 years ago
Registered 20 years agoI'd second Aperture Priority mode, rather than full manual. You don't really lose much over full manual, but you gain a simpler interface, especially if your camera doesn't have two dials (or you're using a compact). -
No, imho go manual right from the start. It helps you to realise that there are no hard and fast rules about metering and just because your camera says that these specific values are the right ones doesn't make it so. Fully manual gives you a much better feel for the relationship between aperture and shutter speed and available light, and it encourages you to experiment with metering. Don't use auto ISO either, change ISO manually so you know what you're doing and why. And chimp your histograms constantly. -
henro_ben 2,393 posts
Seen 21 hours ago
Registered 15 years agoAnother vote for full manual here. Much prefer it myself & I think you'll learn the relationship between iso/shutter/aperture quicker this way, although it'll be a bit harder than using one of the priority modes to start with. -
Nth 3,164 posts
Seen 9 hours ago
Registered 12 years agoPeople with 3 character user names are correct in their advice on this subject .gif)
-
henro_ben 2,393 posts
Seen 21 hours ago
Registered 15 years agoNth wrote:
People with 3 character user names are correct in their advice on this subject
Says biased, advice giving 3 character username who happens to be wrong.gif)
. -
Neut 377 posts
Seen 2 years ago
Registered 12 years agoDefinitely go for full manual, it's slightly more fiddly (especially if you're using an entry level slr without separate dials for aperture and shutter speed) but it's worth it. You feel more in control and there's a more direct and obvious relationship between what you're doing with the camera and the photo you get out of it at the end.
I reckon I've learned more in the last 6 months of shooting in manual than I had in the previous 3 years of using aperture priority. Granted part of that is me putting in more effort in learning but shooting in manual encourages you to learn more anyway rather than letting the camera do half the work.
Once you're comfortable and know what you're doing, then use aperture priority for the sake of convenience. -
hypernova 1,969 posts
Seen 1 day ago
Registered 16 years agootto wrote:
And chimp your histograms constantly.
? -
henro_ben 2,393 posts
Seen 21 hours ago
Registered 15 years agohypernova wrote:
otto wrote:
And chimp your histograms constantly.
?
Means to look at the screen on the back of the camera all the time. It's not a very common phrase, apart from otto using it the only places I've ever seen it have been on a couple of American photography forums. -
[link=http://luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/understanding-histograms.shtml">Histograms tell you lots and help you to judge your metering. So -
henro_ben wrote:
Wasn't aware it was so uncommon! I wonder where I first heard it? I'm sure I see it a lot.
hypernova wrote:
otto wrote:
And chimp your histograms constantly.
?
Means to look at the screen on the back of the camera all the time. It's not a very common phrase, apart from otto using it the only places I've ever seen it have been on a couple of American photography forums. -
henro_ben 2,393 posts
Seen 21 hours ago
Registered 15 years agootto wrote:
Wasn't aware it was so uncommon! I wonder where I first heard it? I'm sure I see it a lot.
Could be wrong but I think it's an americanism - so if you spend a lot of time on us photography sites I guess you'd see it more often? -
mal 29,326 posts
Seen 4 years ago
Registered 20 years agohenro_ben wrote:
My camera doesn't show the histogram while shooting, It does however show the estimated exposure while shooting in the viewfinder, which is well worth observing, since (at default afaik) it will take a shot even if badly exposed if it's told you so and you've pressed the shutter anyway.
hypernova wrote:
otto wrote:
And chimp your histograms constantly.
?
Means to look at the screen on the back of the camera all the time.
I still say driving both shutter speed and aperture when you've only got one set of controls is unecessary. Use AP and one dial and watch the shutter speed and exposure indicator.
Edit: Not heard of chimping, but props to Otto for introducing a new phrase -
henro_ben wrote:
I don't though.
if you spend a lot of time on us photography sites I guess you'd see it more often?
I don't think it's an Americanism, it's too recent for that, these days neologisms tend to be global from the outset, especially tech ones.
mal, don't you have a D70? You can definitely view the histogram on a D70 while shooting, it's in the options.
.gif)
.gif)
Sometimes posts may contain links to online retail stores. If you click on one and make a purchase we may receive a small commission. For more information, go here.
