RE: Canon XSi (450D) Shots in Delaware (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Fun] >> Sports & Hobbies



Message

TMeeks -> RE: Canon XSi (450D) Shots in Delaware (7/9/2008 1:56:06 PM)

There are two buttons on the back of the camera in the upper right hand corner. They are the AEAF Lock and the AF Point Selection Button. Both are critical to learn how to set them to get perfect pictures. Most people having 'focus problems' probably are running the camera in Automatic AF Mode.

There are several focus modes on the XSi. One of them is Automatic, where any of the focal points can be chosen by the camera and the other is manual, where you choose the focal point. Use the latter. To do this, press the rightmost button and then hit the 'SET' button until just one point, in the center of the viewfinder, is selected. Then try the focus test. I believe that you will see significant improvement.

You should be able to get at least this kind of resolution out of long shots, using spot focus. Now, one thing people forget when they 'pixel peep' at leaves in the distance is that generally leaves are constantly moving if only ever so slightly. So, getting an absolutely sharp image of a leaf in the distance is purely luck.

Here is a link that shows the buttons and mentions a bit about how they work.

You really don't need a mounting ring for the 100mm if you have a fairly solid tripod. It's heavier than the KIT lens; but, not heavy in the grand scheme of lens weights. The 100mm Macro is one of the best buys of any lens. But, do not expect much real depth of field when doing macro work. And, do not think that stepping the aperture down too far will improve it. The 'sweet spot' is somewhere in the mid-range, like 5.6 - 8.0 under most conditions. Don't hesitate to bump the ISO up in the XSi to get the right aperture range. It's the least noisy camera I've ever had.

You NOT have a bad lens if you cannot even get a bug in full focus. That is just the nature of macro photography. So, focus on the eyes for bugs. As you move farther back from the subject the depth of field will improve. But, there is a trick to getting the WHOLE bug or flower in focus and that is to use a product called HELICON FOCUS. It's a wonderful tool and hanging out there to view the results will inspire your efforts.

When on a tripod, try using the LiveView mode for macro shots. It's amazing.


quote:

ORIGINAL: PolarBear

Got the XSi!

I think I got one of the models that has some focusing issues. I saw lots of comments about that on dpreview forums. I can't seem to get much to focus correctly, sometimes closer shots are OK but longer ones almost always are blurry.

However I think I have confirmed that it is only the kit lens, not the camera itself. The 100mm macro lens I also got is quite amazing. I took a picture of a little flower and it fills my entire 28" monitor, most of it in good clarity. [:D] It also focuses longer distance fairly well. So that was probably a good buy.

Tonight I'll hopefully try my kit lens on my boss' Rebel XT and his lens on mine, to provide more confirmation that the problem is only the lens.

It's also possible that I'm doing something wrong, but I doubt it.



PolarBear -> RE: Canon XSi (450D) Shots in Delaware (7/9/2008 9:08:48 PM)

TMeeks: Thanks! That point selection button improved things significantly. Need a few more tests to verify that it is all good. I couldn't select it in full auto mode, which I had been using until now. Surely auto mode is usually more in focus???

Note that I don't plan to use auto in the long term.



TMeeks -> RE: Canon XSi (450D) Shots in Delaware (7/9/2008 10:10:38 PM)

No, full autofocus is not at all reliable because it's biased to picking up the closest thing in the picture.

It's best to either shoot in 'P' or one of the style modes as you begin to learn the camera. For instance, try the 'Landscape' style and see how that works for you. That probably biases it for inifinity.

There is another idea, to eliminate, as much as possible, any effect that your own movements have on the apparent focus of the image. This requires that you take control of your camera and manually set the shutter speed. I almost always shoot in Shutter Priority Mode because the older I get the less steady I am. So, set the model dial on 'TV' for Canons or 'S' for Nikons and use the main dial (Page 70 in the XSi Manual) to set a shutter speed at 1/60 or above. Outside I prefer 1/200 and inside I usually use 1/90 unless I have to use 1/60.

When the shutter speed drops below 1/60 any movement you make is going to affect focus unless you are on a tripod and shooting with a remote shutter release. Even the mirror swinging up can introduce movement in the camera that affects the image when shooting in macro mode.



quote:

ORIGINAL: PolarBear

TMeeks: Thanks! That point selection button improved things significantly. Need a few more tests to verify that it is all good. I couldn't select it in full auto mode, which I had been using until now. Surely auto mode is usually more in focus???

Note that I don't plan to use auto in the long term.



bluestone -> RE: Canon XSi (450D) Shots in Delaware (7/10/2008 9:03:06 AM)

I have found that the heavier the lens, the more I need a tripod and remote to capture the shot.

I have a sigma 70-300mm 1:4-5.6Dg, and unless I am standing directly over a flower, I just can't hold it steady, as it seems to be a slow lens. And with night photography where I am using slower shutter speeds, a remote and tripod are a must



TMeeks -> RE: Canon XSi (450D) Shots in Delaware (7/10/2008 12:36:48 PM)

These days I even have trouble using a monopod for the 100mm macro lens. So, I let the shutter help me out by setting it as fast as possible.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bluestone

I have found that the heavier the lens, the more I need a tripod and remote to capture the shot.

I have a sigma 70-300mm 1:4-5.6Dg, and unless I am standing directly over a flower, I just can't hold it steady, as it seems to be a slow lens. And with night photography where I am using slower shutter speeds, a remote and tripod are a must



OLEEguacamole -> RE: Canon XSi (450D) Shots in Delaware (7/11/2008 12:37:55 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ezri


Did I under sell myself? By the worlds standards- most likely... Do I care? NO! would I charge more to someone else? probably. How much? I dunno- but I really do need to sit down and make up a price sheet huh?

~e[/color]

a price sheet is a good idea. you can always write fees waved or discount ___% on the sheet for a customer. it shows your value. put a "prices good through____" this makes it easier to raise your prices when you realize that they should.



TMeeks -> Nikon review opportunity (7/11/2008 6:44:44 PM)

I usually shoot with a Canon SLR. But, this weekend I plan to use a Nikon D50. The make of a camera means very little to me. So, I will try to give as unbiased review and comparison of the two systems as possible. I might even be able to set up some side-by-side shots to further help see how they are alike and differ.

The lens that I'll be using is a AF-S 24-120mm VR. On the BHPhoto web site many of the reviewers complain that it is not a very sharp lens. But, the little that I've been able to play with it, it seems very sharp with a 6mpx camera. I seriously doubt that I will find any glaring differences; but, it will be interesting to find out. I'll post some pictures, good or bad. The Nikon doesn't have an external flash so if I shoot with the onboard flash I'll be using a PUFFER to diffuse the light. If you have a camera with an external flash attachment and a pop-up flash then the PUFFER is one of the best treats you can give yourself.

Is there anything special you'd like me to try?



PolarBear -> RE: Nikon review opportunity (7/12/2008 2:38:56 AM)

Have to wonder if a really thin sheet of paper and a bit of Scotch tape would do the same thing as the puffer, for $29 less ... [8|]

(Guess that means I'm not "pro" yet ... )



BeckeyZ -> RE: Nikon review opportunity (7/12/2008 3:45:49 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PolarBear

Have to wonder if a really thin sheet of paper and a bit of Scotch tape would do the same thing as the puffer, for $29 less ... [8|]

(Guess that means I'm not "pro" yet ... )


only if it was some opaque paper that would still let the light through.



car2ner -> RE: Nikon review opportunity (7/12/2008 7:06:52 AM)

not too hard to find, but the tape gets things sticky. I guess the 30 bucks pays for convenience getting it on and off and not getting crumpled.



PolarBear -> RE: Nikon review opportunity (7/12/2008 7:55:29 AM)

Also ...

Do you all feel silly when you're out in public and have your camera on a tripod?

Living in San Antonio, I'll probably be going to the River Walk in the next 2-3 weeks, when the mother-in-law visits. Would like to take all this new gear and practice taking hopefully really good shots of it.

But, when I have a tripod set up in public, I feel like everyone is watching me thinking "what is he doing?"

Have any of you been harassed while doing it?



TMeeks -> RE: Nikon review opportunity (7/12/2008 8:52:58 AM)

Hi Polar Bear,

At Ritz, even though it says $29 on the package, if you have them check their system it comes up $19.95. I just bought on for a niece so that's how I know.

A thin piece of cloth, plastic or paper will help. But, while it will soften light, it probably will not make it as big as a Puffer. And, the bigger the light source, the better the lighting.

If you look closely at the Puffer, you will see that it has little knobs on it and it's shaped in a semi-circle both horizontally and vertically... giving it the 'Puffer' name. The basic shape spreads the light and makes it much bigger than the tiny source flash. The little knobs further distribute the light evenly, acting like little lenses.

Finally, the color of the plastic was carefully chosen so as to not alter the original color temperature of the flash.

But, having said that, you will find many sources on the web where people make their own diffusers out of milk jugs, cutting mats, paper and even bubble wrap!

Here are some of the more clever samples.

Thien Nguyen's Super Bend Card

Homemade Flash Toys

Of course, unless one truly likes to tinker, the time that it takes to make a truly effective diffuser probably costs more than simply buying the Puffer. [:)]

But, as you can see, you have lots of options for diffusion and they will certainly help even if they aren't as fully effective as the Puffer.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PolarBear

Have to wonder if a really thin sheet of paper and a bit of Scotch tape would do the same thing as the puffer, for $29 less ... [8|]

(Guess that means I'm not "pro" yet ... )



TMeeks -> RE: Nikon review opportunity (7/12/2008 9:27:47 AM)

Perhaps I've gotten used to it. But, the tripod is the least of the silly looking rigs I end up using. Try carrying around a camera with a flash bracket with off-shoe flash attached to it having a LightSphere II on the flash. [:D][:D]

In situations where I will be in public I either use a monopod or a small, lightweight Manfrotto tripod called the Modo Mini Tripod with Pistol Grip Ball Head ($59). It's not the world's greatest tripod; but, it's very compact and does the job. All the frog images were shot on that tripod.


quote:

ORIGINAL: PolarBear

Also ...

Do you all feel silly when you're out in public and have your camera on a tripod?

Living in San Antonio, I'll probably be going to the River Walk in the next 2-3 weeks, when the mother-in-law visits. Would like to take all this new gear and practice taking hopefully really good shots of it.

But, when I have a tripod set up in public, I feel like everyone is watching me thinking "what is he doing?"

Have any of you been harassed while doing it?



PolarBear -> RE: Nikon review opportunity (7/13/2008 5:01:48 AM)

Thanks TMeeks. Lots of accessories I "need" ranging in price from $10 to $1000. So I think I'll see what I actually end up using the camera for before I buy any of them. I suppose the puffer would be great for indoor portrait shots. Not sure how much of that I'll be doing. I'll probably prefer outdoor/natural light for that as much as possible.

I can see how the tripod would be useful. I suppose I can get by with the one I have, if I go on a weekday and set it up in slightly less trafficked and/or wider areas.



TMeeks -> RE: Nikon review opportunity (7/13/2008 9:37:12 AM)

It is a good idea, outdoors, to still use a flash for 'fill' to soften the harsh shadows of direct sunlight. But, I do so with some type of diffusion.


quote:

ORIGINAL: PolarBear

Thanks TMeeks. Lots of accessories I "need" ranging in price from $10 to $1000. So I think I'll see what I actually end up using the camera for before I buy any of them. I suppose the puffer would be great for indoor portrait shots. Not sure how much of that I'll be doing. I'll probably prefer outdoor/natural light for that as much as possible.

I can see how the tripod would be useful. I suppose I can get by with the one I have, if I go on a weekday and set it up in slightly less trafficked and/or wider areas.



David_D -> Flash Chat (7/13/2008 10:48:31 PM)

I wonder if using a flash would've helped with this one I took today: http://www.flickr.com/photos/eventualdave/2665427819/

I was maybe 10 feet away on the ground. Then again, it might've freaked out the little dude and I don't wanna do that.



car2ner -> RE: Flash Chat (7/14/2008 7:29:32 AM)

Maybe I'd try bumping up the contrast and creating a shape instead of trying to bring out the detail of the bird...

I'm gonna mess with it a bit and put it into the crosswalkers flicker group.



TMeeks -> RE: Flash Chat (7/14/2008 10:27:07 AM)

Orginally, it would have helped. But it does make for a nice silhouette contrasting the bird and branches against the lighter background.

quote:

ORIGINAL: David_D

I wonder if using a flash would've helped with this one I took today: http://www.flickr.com/photos/eventualdave/2665427819/

I was maybe 10 feet away on the ground. Then again, it might've freaked out the little dude and I don't wanna do that.



car2ner -> RE: Flash Chat (7/14/2008 3:33:38 PM)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/car2ner/2667710784/

one thing about "ify" shots. There is more freedom to play with them.



TMeeks -> RE: Flash Chat (7/14/2008 4:40:07 PM)

Nice restoration of the colors and the treatment was nice, too.

Here is my stab at it. I chose to crop the image, lighten it and add some saturation. Noise was the big problem.

Cropped Bird Photo

One of the reasons that I've generally abandoned Photobucket, except for demos like this, is that it seems to process the images before showing them. It was already overly sharpened; but, it wasn't nearly so harsh as the Photobucket version.


quote:

ORIGINAL: car2ner

http://www.flickr.com/photos/car2ner/2667710784/

one thing about "ify" shots. There is more freedom to play with them.



car2ner -> RE: Flash Chat (7/14/2008 5:06:38 PM)

cool tMeeks.... shows how the center of differance changes as well. In mine the center of interest is more in the texture of the branch with the bird as a highlight. In yours, the center of interest is the bird, the branch as texture. Fun to see the differance.

Anyone else have something we can play with?



David_D -> RE: Flash Chat (7/14/2008 6:58:47 PM)

Haha, cool! Thanks for giving your perspectives on how to improve that one. Very neat to see.



David_D -> RE: Flash Chat (7/14/2008 7:33:39 PM)

TMeeks, I loved that crop you did so much I ran with it. http://www.flickr.com/photos/eventualdave/2668783151/

Went in another direction with the color and figured since it was already so noisy I'd just go the full 9 and give it that "film grain" effect.



TMeeks -> RE: Flash Chat (7/14/2008 11:07:00 PM)

I love that direction!

When I first began to shoot video, we used vidicon and plumbicon tubes in the cameras. The plumbicon came closest to giving the look of film. There was a gentleness to the image that all of us loved. When digital came along, we hated it. Too harsh and too sharp.

Even today, if you go to a sight like www.pana3ccduser.com where people are serious about using video for film making, they go after that old non-interlace, 24p look.

That is what comes to my mind when seeing your new image. There is a gentleness about it that actually comes from making the noise work for you. It's like patina on a bronze sculpture. It's very, very nice. I like it a LOT. [sm=thumbsup.gif]

quote:

ORIGINAL: David_D

TMeeks, I loved that crop you did so much I ran with it. http://www.flickr.com/photos/eventualdave/2668783151/

Went in another direction with the color and figured since it was already so noisy I'd just go the full 9 and give it that "film grain" effect.



TMeeks -> RE: Flash Chat (7/14/2008 11:26:52 PM)

There are so many ways to take a photo and make it come alive. The big difference in digital photography really doesn't come between taking images with a point & shoot vs. an SLR. The big difference is in learning how to extract the beautiful from photos.

Some of the most beautiful work I've seen was on the dpreview.com Casio point and shoot threads from people that weren't afraid to crop an image. When I first ran across 'Artshot Sue' Beatrice she was using a Casio Z50 and getting amazing results. Here is her album.

Artshot Sue's Photos

It appears that she's moved to the Olympus now; but, I don't know which camera she's using. But, it doesn't matter. She's one of those creative people that knows how to get the best out of the equipment she has. Here's a favorite.

A Splash of Color by Sue Beatrice



quote:

ORIGINAL: car2ner

cool tMeeks.... shows how the center of differance changes as well. In mine the center of interest is more in the texture of the branch with the bird as a highlight. In yours, the center of interest is the bird, the branch as texture. Fun to see the differance.

Anyone else have something we can play with?



Page: <<   < prev  42 43 [44] 45 46   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI