Skill Up: A Beginner's Guide To Dslr Photography

[Kan Win]

Hi Folks,

The old ways aren't going to cut it now that you are brandishing state-of-the-art equipment.

Congratulations, you've graduated from a smartphone camera or a cute little
point-and-shoot to a full-blown digital SLR. You probably feel like quite the
pro photographer with that beast of a camera in your hands. The question is, are
you actually shooting like a pro, or are you simply using it as a
point-and-shoot replacement in one of the automatic shooting modes?

You're hardly to blame if you're in the latter camp. Digital SLR photography
can be a complex skill to master – a fact that isn't helped by the preponderance
of intimidating dials, buttons, and settings on the camera body. That said, if
you want a quick and dirty intro to mastering your digital SLR, you've come to
the right place.

Shoot in style

The fastest way to look like a pro photographer is by holding your camera
like one. This one little detail is what separates the rank amateurs from the
seasoned shooters at a glance, and you'd be surprised at how many digital SLR
owners hold their cameras like they're point-and-shoots.

To hold your digital SLR like a pro, hold the right side of the camera with
your right hand (it usually has a handgrip there for this purpose), and with
your left hand, cup the underside of the camera lens.

This configuration not only reduces camera shake (the main culprit for blurry
photos), but it also ensures all of the camera controls are within easy reach –
you'll be able to reach all of the buttons and dials with your right thumb, and
you can adjust the lens zoom and focus with your left hand.

Say goodbye to automatic (denoted by the 'P' on some cameras and not always "A" as this is for Aperture priority, Win notes btw)

The next step is staying away from the automatic mode – for most of your
shots, at least. Using this setting every now and then is fine, especially if
you don't have time to fiddle around with the camera settings. The automatic
modes on the latest digital SLRs in particular have gotten exceptionally good at
guessing the right settings to apply for each photo, and without any effort,
you'll be able to pump out photos that are several times better than what you
can achieve on a smaller camera.

But as clever as a digital SLR is, it's still just a machine. As the sentient
human being in the equation, you're always going to be a better judge of the
settings that need to be tweaked to get that perfect photo. If you don't have
the time or inclination to wrap your head around settings like white balance,
metering, ISO and aperture, a quick way to adjust a whole bunch of settings at
once to suit particular styles of photography is by using one of the scene
modes.

Every digital SLR has a different selection of scene modes. Some cameras,
such as the Canon EOS 700D and the Nikon D3200, have the scene modes easily
accessible on the mode dial on top of the camera, while others, like the Sony
Alpha SLT-A99V, have a 'SCN' mode on the mode dial, and the scenes themselves
are selected through the on-screen menu. The main scene modes are portrait (for
people shots with nicely blurred backgrounds), landscape (for shots with boosted
colours and sharper details), sports (for freezing fast-moving objects such as
children and pets), and macro (for close-up photography).

Get with the program

The nasty thing about automatic mode is that it thinks it's smarter than you.
In this mode, you can't change any of the camera's settings, not even the flash,
which is a nuisance when you're shooting in dimly lit bars and you want to stick
to the ambient lighting.

This is where swapping over to the Program mode (depicted as 'P' on the mode
dial) comes in handy. Left untouched, it works just like Auto in that it
automatically adjusts the aperture and shutter speed to get the right exposure,
but you also have the freedom of changing various camera settings like the flash
mode, white balance, and ISO.

The raw deal

Once you venture out of the safety net of automatic, it's natural to make a
few mistakes here and there. Image editing software on your PC can help fix
common issues such as exposure, red eye and brightness, and even if all of your
photos already look peachy out of the camera, giving them an extra spit-shine on
your computer will almost always make them look better.

Out of the box, cameras save photos in the common JPG format, and this has
the advantage of small file sizes and universal compatibility with every image
viewer/editor. However, this format also compresses all of the data in your
images in-camera. One of the advantages of shooting with a digital SLR is that
you have the option of saving your photos in RAW.

RAW is the digital equivalent of a film negative, as it captures all of the
data recorded by your camera for each photo. Shooting in RAW has two benefits:
first, you'll get a better result processing the image from RAW to JPG on your
computer than you will in-camera, as the former is far more powerful. Even
better, when it comes time to editing your photos, your image editor will have a
lot more information to work with compared to JPG, giving you more leeway for
correcting things like white balance, blown highlights and sharpness.

Each brand of digital SLR has its own proprietary RAW file format, so you'll
need to use the software that your camera came with to edit those photos. Some
third party image editors such as Adobe Lightroom also support most of the RAW
formats.

Sometimes blur is good

Feeling adventurous? Aperture priority is best semi-manual mode for everyday
photography (denoted by the 'A' on the mode dial), and it will get you producing
professional-looking photos in no time. This mode affects how much of an image
is in focus – also known as its depth of field.

A large depth of field (generally f-stops of f16 and over) makes everything
in the frame sharp, and this is good for landscapes and group shots. A shallow
depth of field, on the other hand (apertures of f4.0 and lower), makes the point
of focus sharp and the rest of the image blurry. The lower the aperture, the
'creamier' the background blur is – a desirable trait for portraits, as it
removes any distracting elements in the background.

There are two caveats when it comes to shooting in aperture priority mode.
Since the aperture has a direct correlation to the camera's shutter speed,
setting the aperture too low (which, unintuitively, is represented by higher
f-stop numbers) can result in shutter speeds that are too slow for shooting
without shaking the camera.

The other thing to bear in mind is that the maximum aperture (represented by
smaller f-stop numbers) you can shoot at is dependent on your camera lens – the
more expensive it is, the wider you'll be able to shoot at. That said, you can
get amazing results out of your camera for very little money by picking up a
cheap 50mm f1.8 lens. For most camera brands, these are available for under
$200 and are well worth the investment

From:-

http://www.theage.com.au/digital-life/cameras/skill-up-a-beginners-guide-to-dslr-photography-20130516-2jod2.html

Win

P.S. note the quote size above. It Kan be done larger

[eezergood]

Thanks very much

[manarak]

yes...

the first step after buying a DSLR and lenses is to check the gear, especially the autofocus. Any lens that doesn't focus well using autofocus should be replaced.

[FracturedRabbit]

Useful introduction, but it perpetuates the misconception that there are two types of cameras: point & shoots and DSLRs; and that the only upgrade from the former is to the latter.

This has ceased to be true for some time and for many people a DSLR may not be the best upgrade solution.

If you want to learn more about photography and want to produce better photos; then a camera which provides you with more control over the shooting process than a point & shoot is what you need. What you probably don't need is a camera with a flapping mirror (a DSLR).

If you are not interested in embarking on a camera system (one where you can purchase one body and multiple lenses to use on that body), then there are number of excellent cameras which will provide you great photos and all the control you could possibly need. Examples would be the Fuji X100S and the Sony RX100. For less money, most of the manufacturers offer small bodied cameras (with rather small sensors) which provide full creative control and pleasing images (e.g. Panasonic LX7, Canon S100, Fuji XF1).

If you want something with multiple lens choice then examples would be the micro-four thirds cameras from Olympus and Panasonic, the Fuji XE-1 and X-Pro lines, and the Sony NEX series.

All of these cameras are mirrorless, which is what separates them from DSLRs. The downside is that their ability to track action is not as good, the upside is that they are smaller, lighter and offer innovations that are lacking in the DSLR sphere (e.g. hydrid viewfinders, advanced stablisiation, manual focus support via focus peaking and magnification). Most of all, IMHO, they are just more fun to shoot with. If you are wanting to upgrade your skills, you are much more likely to make progress with a smaller camera that you can carry with you and use everywhere, rather than a big black brick from Canikon.

The key thing, as mentioned in the article above, it to get away from Auto mode (and "Scene" modes) and learn how to operate the camera, so you understand the relationship between shutter, aperture and ISO and can understand things like exposure compensation and depth of field. If you would like to know a little more about these features, I wrote a little guide which some people have found useful: http://www.pattayadays.com/photography-guide/

[Goshawk]

Useful introduction, but it perpetuates the misconception that there are two types of cameras: point & shoots and DSLRs; and that the only upgrade from the former is to the latter.

This has ceased to be true for some time and for many people a DSLR may not be the best upgrade solution.

If you want to learn more about photography and want to produce better photos; then a camera which provides you with more control over the shooting process than a point & shoot is what you need. What you probably don't need is a camera with a flapping mirror (a DSLR).

wise words and very true... DSLR as it is today is a dying tech. Clunking mechanical 'flapping mirrors' (lol) are stone age nowadays. I predict within 5 years, traditional dslr cameras will be virtually obsolete in terms of mass production. Of course, there'll always be die-hards who will help sustain a niche market for this type of camera.

Evolution...!

[manarak]

Useful introduction, but it perpetuates the misconception that there are two types of cameras: point & shoots and DSLRs; and that the only upgrade from the former is to the latter.

This has ceased to be true for some time and for many people a DSLR may not be the best upgrade solution.

If you want to learn more about photography and want to produce better photos; then a camera which provides you with more control over the shooting process than a point & shoot is what you need. What you probably don't need is a camera with a flapping mirror (a DSLR).

wise words and very true... DSLR as it is today is a dying tech. Clunking mechanical 'flapping mirrors' (lol) are stone age nowadays. I predict within 5 years, traditional dslr cameras will be virtually obsolete in terms of mass production. Of course, there'll always be die-hards who will help sustain a niche market for this type of camera.

Evolution...!

the mirror is not what's clunky.

the lenses are.

and no magic can make enough light hit the sensors to get a good quality picture.

maybe the mirrors will be gone, but the DSLR style cameras will stay, just because of sensor and lens size.

look at the new Nikon D600/800...

see you in 5 years! LOL

[Goshawk]

Useful introduction, but it perpetuates the misconception that there are two types of cameras: point & shoots and DSLRs; and that the only upgrade from the former is to the latter.

This has ceased to be true for some time and for many people a DSLR may not be the best upgrade solution.

If you want to learn more about photography and want to produce better photos; then a camera which provides you with more control over the shooting process than a point & shoot is what you need. What you probably don't need is a camera with a flapping mirror (a DSLR).

wise words and very true... DSLR as it is today is a dying tech. Clunking mechanical 'flapping mirrors' (lol) are stone age nowadays. I predict within 5 years, traditional dslr cameras will be virtually obsolete in terms of mass production. Of course, there'll always be die-hards who will help sustain a niche market for this type of camera.

Evolution...!

maybe the mirrors will be gone,

...is my point. Thanks for agreeing.

[FracturedRabbit]

If the mirror is gone, it is no longer a DSLR... I agree with Goshawk, the mirror is dying. With the advances in electronic viewfinders and the ability to install PDAF focusing tech on the sensor (thus bringing moving target focus ability up to DSLR levels), the mirror becomes pointless technology, adding weight, bulk and cost with no benefit.

Sensor/lens size has nothing to do with whether or not a camera has a mirror, it's just how the market is evolving. If you have the cash, Leica will sell you a full frame mirrorless camera with some of the best lenses in the world . Sony have the RX1, full-frame with a gorgeous Zeiss lens; and you can be sure that it won't be long before they introduce a full frame mirrorless system with a range of lenses.

Most DSLRs are APS-C size sensors, and both Sony and Fuji have mirrorless systems at this size; and Fuji will no doubt introduce a full frame system at some point along with Sony.

Image quality is not dictated by lens size. Leica lenses are small, it would be a brave man that suggests their image quality isless than exceptional. If you compare DSLR lenses with their SLR equivalent from the film camera days, you will find that their size has grown, most likely so that they don't look out of place on today's bloated bodies. This is Canikon's problem. If they introduce mirrorless cameras at the APS-C or full frame size, then they will have to make the bodies large to fit their monster lens collection. Other manufacturers have been able to start from scratch and offer small bodies and small lenses.

I used to shoot with a Canon 1D and a range of lenses. If I put them all in a backpack to take on holiday, it was more than 10 kilos; ridiculous. Now I shoot with Micro Four Thirds and have a camera and four lenses in a small bag that weighs very little that I can take anywhere. The photos are the equal in IQ to the Canon. All I lose is the ability to print higher than A2 size (which I never want to do anyway), and I lose some depth of field at equivalent focal lengths; but as my walk-around lens for the Canon was F4 (and was horribly soft wide open) and my current walk-around is an F1.4 lens designed by Leica and sharp at all apertures, I don't find that to be an issue. A full frame camera would also be better at high ISOs; but I can use an F0.95 aperture lens and a body which offers 5-axis stabilisation and therefore very low shutter speeds, which rather diminishes that advantage. I would never go back to a DSLR, it's just not fun.

My neighbour had the chance to take some comparison shots between a Nikon D600 and an Olympus E-M5. http://www.microfourthirds.info/2013/03/d600-takes-on-the-e-m5/

Not convinced that the increase in cost, weight and bulk is justified by the marginal improvement in IQ. And the owner of the D600 had to return it because of the problem with oil spots on the sensor generated by the mirror mechanism...

Five years time: Mirrorless, electronic shutters, wide range of choices at all sensor sizes (maybe even bigger than "full frame" which is a meaningless size anyway), smaller lenses, . See you in 5 years!

[ThaiBob]

I have to agree, for a majority of people who take pictures, mirrorless systems will be the wave of the future. But unlike some here, I view these new systems as not some quantum leap in the technology of taking better pictures but for what it truly is... a new marketing strategy by the big camera manufacturers to sell a product for the masses. The marketers will promote that the next step up for the point and shooters should be their expensive mirrorless systems because of their convenience not because they necessarily take better pictures than a DSLR. I believe the compact camera and not the DSLR is the next endangered species.

[FracturedRabbit]

Indeed, the compact camera/point & shoot is under attack from phone cameras from below, and the more advanced compact system cameras from above.

Mirrorless cameras don't take better pictures than a DSLR, they take equivalent pictures in a more convenient package. But to the extent that there is technical innovation taking place, it is taking place in the mirrorless sphere.

[Robby nz]

Thanks Kan win.

I'm pretty new to this and am learning all the time, I hope, but I do have to say there are a great deal of different types of photography, the many different subjects on here show that.

Seems to me that different types need different ways of doing things, for instance I am mainly interested in nature and often have only seconds from seeing something I want to get a shot of till it is gone.

That means I don't have time to play with F stops and shutter speed so for me auto, with flash turned off, is the way to go.

I have also found that auto focus is no use to me as the machine has no idea what I am looking at and is liable to focus on something else.