Upgrading to Dslr
Discussion
Firstly I would like to thank the couple of people that have contacted me since I bought the 350D, particularly Simpo_two.
Having played around with the settings (Apertures and shutter speeds etc) on my Canon S1 Is, I thought upgrading to a Dslr would not be much problem.
Here are a few observations I have made.
The Dslr has lots more functions, many of which are easily adjusted with shortcut buttons as opposed to using the menu's.
I am determined to use the 'creative' side of the menu dial, but the Dslr is harder to use.
Using the old camera, if I changed a setting, half pressing the shutter gave me a preview of what the pic would look like. Not so with the Dslr. Instead I take more pics at different settings to get the one I want. Many are over or under exposed.
It's like starting all over again.
Good job I like playing with camera's!
Having played around with the settings (Apertures and shutter speeds etc) on my Canon S1 Is, I thought upgrading to a Dslr would not be much problem.
Here are a few observations I have made.
The Dslr has lots more functions, many of which are easily adjusted with shortcut buttons as opposed to using the menu's.
I am determined to use the 'creative' side of the menu dial, but the Dslr is harder to use.
Using the old camera, if I changed a setting, half pressing the shutter gave me a preview of what the pic would look like. Not so with the Dslr. Instead I take more pics at different settings to get the one I want. Many are over or under exposed.
It's like starting all over again.
Good job I like playing with camera's!
Interesting observations.
I must say the move, in a different direction, from film SLR to dSLR is a complete revelation.
All those things I meant to try one day are all coming out now.
No cost implications*, and immediate (or near immediate) feedback and plenty of chance to play around (e.g. with manual metering situations).
For the new Nikon owners I would also strongly recommend this find: an e-book about the camera and digital photography/images
Perhaps (if Simpo doesn't get in first
) I could offer some basic tuition on what I've found, for a small fee..... 
*Not completely true, I suppose, I have purchased recently:
second CF card
filter rings to back one lens onto another
adaptall mount to try a scruffy old Tamron lens on the Nikon
body cap to try pinhole images
IR filter
new grey card
I must say the move, in a different direction, from film SLR to dSLR is a complete revelation.
All those things I meant to try one day are all coming out now.
No cost implications*, and immediate (or near immediate) feedback and plenty of chance to play around (e.g. with manual metering situations).
For the new Nikon owners I would also strongly recommend this find: an e-book about the camera and digital photography/images
Perhaps (if Simpo doesn't get in first
) I could offer some basic tuition on what I've found, for a small fee..... *Not completely true, I suppose, I have purchased recently:
second CF card
filter rings to back one lens onto another
adaptall mount to try a scruffy old Tamron lens on the Nikon
body cap to try pinhole images
IR filter
new grey card
Happy to help 
I was happily familiar with film SLRs for years, so a DSLR was a logical step but I was still surprised at how many variables there are. It was certainly a step forward in complexity - and ergo control. The immediacy of digital really lets you fine-tune what you do, but it's unforgiving in that you don't have a lab set to 'auto-correct' to even out the problems.
If coming from a compact, I can quite understand the extra problems as suddenly you have to know more things and what they do. The laws of physics are suddenly upon you and understanding them helps you get the shots you want more quickly. I don't know what kind of photos you like but my best advice is to plug through the manual, try to understand everything as you go (we are here to help of course!) and then decide what's worth remembering and what isn't, for your style. No-one needs to know every menu function, but a few favourites stashed in the braincells - eg switching off AF - will help. One problem you might find is that whilst a manual tells you what every button does and how to work it, it won't tell you WHEN to use it... that's where experience comes in.
All you need then is 'flying hours' so that control is more or less instinctive, like driving a car, then you can get your head out of the office and concentrate on finding great photos
I was happily familiar with film SLRs for years, so a DSLR was a logical step but I was still surprised at how many variables there are. It was certainly a step forward in complexity - and ergo control. The immediacy of digital really lets you fine-tune what you do, but it's unforgiving in that you don't have a lab set to 'auto-correct' to even out the problems. If coming from a compact, I can quite understand the extra problems as suddenly you have to know more things and what they do. The laws of physics are suddenly upon you and understanding them helps you get the shots you want more quickly. I don't know what kind of photos you like but my best advice is to plug through the manual, try to understand everything as you go (we are here to help of course!) and then decide what's worth remembering and what isn't, for your style. No-one needs to know every menu function, but a few favourites stashed in the braincells - eg switching off AF - will help. One problem you might find is that whilst a manual tells you what every button does and how to work it, it won't tell you WHEN to use it... that's where experience comes in.
All you need then is 'flying hours' so that control is more or less instinctive, like driving a car, then you can get your head out of the office and concentrate on finding great photos
You're catching on fast I'd agree with both your statements. The D70 tends to underexposure and maybe the 350D does too; it's not a bad thing but can be irritating at times. Dialling in +EV, as you did, is the simplest way of correcting it BUT it does depend on the scene. If you leave your camera on +1 - and it's easy to do accidentally - you may find that other photos will be overexposed with burnt-out highlights, which is a Bad Thing.
The LCD monitor is not much use in judging exposure - or focus - often, photos look fine there when they're not. You'd think that a modern DSLR packed with gubbins could get a perfect exposure every time, but no - from my experience you have to be more watchful than ever before. That's where the histogram comes in, and also a highlights display if you have one.
More later if you need it
I'd agree with both your statements. The D70 tends to underexposure and maybe the 350D does too; it's not a bad thing but can be irritating at times. Dialling in +EV, as you did, is the simplest way of correcting it BUT it does depend on the scene. If you leave your camera on +1 - and it's easy to do accidentally - you may find that other photos will be overexposed with burnt-out highlights, which is a Bad Thing. The LCD monitor is not much use in judging exposure - or focus - often, photos look fine there when they're not. You'd think that a modern DSLR packed with gubbins could get a perfect exposure every time, but no - from my experience you have to be more watchful than ever before. That's where the histogram comes in, and also a highlights display if you have one.
More later if you need it
Ex-biker said:Now that's a stupid thing to say!
Ok now the stupid questions start.
There's no such thing as a "stupid" question!!!! Anyway, Simpo's said it all. But remember the chant (which I just learnt on moving to digital):
Histograms are your friends
Histograms are your friends
Histograms....
...well you get my drift.
Also, when it gets down to the fractions of an EV, one person's underexposure, is the next person's overexposure. Whilst sometimes it will be obvious, don't be afraid to experiment to produce high key or low.....(what's the opposite of high key
??)..."thingy" images.... Nice bloom BTW!
GetCarter said:It's a definite Nikon trait. As Simpo says, at least you are more prone to losing shadow detail than having highlights blown that way......
Interestingly, both the D1X and the D2X seem to marginally under expose - I thought I was going blind, but others have said the same thing.
Funny though. Probably Nikon didn't foresee the huge new dSLR market and, of course, this tendancy won't be immediately understandable to all newcomers. I wonder if it'll backfire, or the new "low end" models will be designed differently in this regard
beano500 said:
or the new "low end" models will be designed differently in this regard
One problem is exposure latitude. IIRC entry level DSLRs manage about 5 stops whilst the pro ones have about 7. If it's the chip making the difference, then we're stuck with it. If it's software, then there's a chance for us eventually... I think it's another case of 'YGWYPF....'
Most (possibly all?) DSLRs will underexpose as default, as it is easier to recover image information from an under-exposed image than one that is over exposed.
When the highlights are blown out (i.e., the over exposed bits), that information is gone, however dslrs are very good at extracting detail from dark areas, and a bit of tweaking in something like Photoshop will get the image looking much better.
The tool you want to use is called Levels, and basically it "stretches out" the range of colours in the image, making full use of the range of full black to full white.
E.g., the histogram for the original underexposed image is this:
But dragging the little arrow at the right hand side of the graph over to the edge of the histogram produces this image and histogram:
(the reason it's full of white lines is due to the small no. of colours contained in your web-sized image - the original file from the camera will have more information in it to work with.)
You could have got a similar exposure by checking the histogram on the camera, and increasing the exposure compensation until the histogram looked more like the 2nd one above than the 1st one, but just make sure that it's not quite touching the right hand side of the graph, as that's when you start to lose highlight info.
HTH
>> Edited by ehasler on Thursday 7th April 13:03
When the highlights are blown out (i.e., the over exposed bits), that information is gone, however dslrs are very good at extracting detail from dark areas, and a bit of tweaking in something like Photoshop will get the image looking much better.
The tool you want to use is called Levels, and basically it "stretches out" the range of colours in the image, making full use of the range of full black to full white.
E.g., the histogram for the original underexposed image is this:
But dragging the little arrow at the right hand side of the graph over to the edge of the histogram produces this image and histogram:
(the reason it's full of white lines is due to the small no. of colours contained in your web-sized image - the original file from the camera will have more information in it to work with.)
You could have got a similar exposure by checking the histogram on the camera, and increasing the exposure compensation until the histogram looked more like the 2nd one above than the 1st one, but just make sure that it's not quite touching the right hand side of the graph, as that's when you start to lose highlight info.
HTH
>> Edited by ehasler on Thursday 7th April 13:03
Don't do this! I'm getting that NAS feeling all over again.........
Now, to my eye (and averagely set up monitor), I have no detail in that red. And it's crying out for it.
If you've blown the highlights (and your histogram, particularly for the red channel assuming your in RGB colourspace, is off to the right) then you've ended up over exposing.
Your meter should be aiming to get an 18% grey to be metered correctly. So you could try spot metering on the petals.
Alternately you could try "bracketing".
Bracketing means taking more than one shot at different settings, typically, but not restricted to, one underexposed, one by what the meter says and one overexposed. In this case you want a little less light hitting the sensor (just think about it logically - you don't need as many photons as you got, right?!). Always worth breaking it down to simple ideas, that's the way I've found of getting to grips with difficult lighting anyway....
As an alternative, you might try backlighting the petals. This would be a way of capturing their structure and the detail and texture that they have.
Just some ideas.....
Edit: (Actually I say I have "no" detail - that's not entirely true or fair. May I just revise that? There is detail but it doesn't stand out on first impression - I get a bit of a sort of "splashed a bit of red paint on the canvas" initial impact as opposed to a "WOW! Look at the beautiful colour, subtle detail, texture - I can almost SMELL that bloom" ..... if you know what I mean)
>> Edited by beano500 on Friday 8th April 09:55
If you've blown the highlights (and your histogram, particularly for the red channel assuming your in RGB colourspace, is off to the right) then you've ended up over exposing.
Your meter should be aiming to get an 18% grey to be metered correctly. So you could try spot metering on the petals.
Alternately you could try "bracketing".
Bracketing means taking more than one shot at different settings, typically, but not restricted to, one underexposed, one by what the meter says and one overexposed. In this case you want a little less light hitting the sensor (just think about it logically - you don't need as many photons as you got, right?!). Always worth breaking it down to simple ideas, that's the way I've found of getting to grips with difficult lighting anyway....
As an alternative, you might try backlighting the petals. This would be a way of capturing their structure and the detail and texture that they have.
Just some ideas.....
Edit: (Actually I say I have "no" detail - that's not entirely true or fair. May I just revise that? There is detail but it doesn't stand out on first impression - I get a bit of a sort of "splashed a bit of red paint on the canvas" initial impact as opposed to a "WOW! Look at the beautiful colour, subtle detail, texture - I can almost SMELL that bloom" ..... if you know what I mean)
>> Edited by beano500 on Friday 8th April 09:55
Cos I doubt that my [pic] will work here's
a) a link to a similarly difficult subject
and
b) a link to a shot I was vaguely happy with
But notice how those creamy whites are a difficult one, if you want to keep everything else OK. It's a bit like juggling treacle - you just know from the outset it's gonna get messy!
a) a link to a similarly difficult subject
and
b) a link to a shot I was vaguely happy with
But notice how those creamy whites are a difficult one, if you want to keep everything else OK. It's a bit like juggling treacle - you just know from the outset it's gonna get messy!
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff