Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Nikons lenses questions
- Thread starter conamor
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I do not have a SB-400, but my understanding is that it does not have any manual controls other than the on/off switch, so if you want to use it off-camera with any functionality, you are basically limited to using a TTL-compatible sync cable.
If you have any interest in learning about lighting, I highly recommend looking through the Strobist website (www.strobist.com). The Lighting 101 section is a great starting point.
Don't use a flash.. learn how to photograph with wider aperture and higher ISO
Learn how the light enters the camera. And how you can manipulate it. Of course if you want to use a flash, use a flash... but DSLR cameras are powerful machines that can capture even the slightest light... Use your 35mm 1.8 at full open aperture at 1.8 focus on your subject, maybe bump your ISO to 400-800 and get some really nice photos indoors, with great FOV and bokeh
I would echo many of the replies already posted. When just starting out in photography, it's easy to fall into the trap of "my photos suck --> therefore I need to buy better gear." This rarely fixes the problem. The reason is that the problems you are seeing usually aren't the result of gear, they are a reflection of your inexperience as a photographer.
The thoughtful responses to these gear questions (as seen in this thread) are often "what is wrong with the gear you already have? What are you hoping to gain with an upgrade?" These are the right responses, but the problem is that you may not have enough experience to be able to answer them. All you know is that you aren't happy with your images but don't really know why. Which is why you thought a gear upgrade would make them better and prompted you to post in the first place.
The real answer (as also posted in this thread) is that you need to learn the fundamentals of photography. You need to understand the basics of exposure: aperture, shutter speed, and ISO. And how changing any of these will impact your image. You also need to learn about composition (like the rule of thirds, leading lines, etc.). And about light. It's only when you have a good sense for these basic elements that you can know how your current gear is not letting you capture what you want to capture.
Read (either in books or online). And then shoot more, shoot more, shoot more with the gear you have. Try to ask yourself why you *don't* like a particular photo you took. Or the opposite, why you *do* like a particular photo you took. Post your photos online asking for feedback and advice (such as here in dedicated threads you start or in the POTD thread).
Best of luck
Photography can be a fun diversion, a fulfilling hobby, or a career.
The thoughtful responses to these gear questions (as seen in this thread) are often "what is wrong with the gear you already have? What are you hoping to gain with an upgrade?" These are the right responses, but the problem is that you may not have enough experience to be able to answer them. All you know is that you aren't happy with your images but don't really know why. Which is why you thought a gear upgrade would make them better and prompted you to post in the first place.
The real answer (as also posted in this thread) is that you need to learn the fundamentals of photography. You need to understand the basics of exposure: aperture, shutter speed, and ISO. And how changing any of these will impact your image. You also need to learn about composition (like the rule of thirds, leading lines, etc.). And about light. It's only when you have a good sense for these basic elements that you can know how your current gear is not letting you capture what you want to capture.
Read (either in books or online). And then shoot more, shoot more, shoot more with the gear you have. Try to ask yourself why you *don't* like a particular photo you took. Or the opposite, why you *do* like a particular photo you took. Post your photos online asking for feedback and advice (such as here in dedicated threads you start or in the POTD thread).
Best of luck
Photography can be a fun diversion, a fulfilling hobby, or a career.
I would echo many of the replies already posted. When just starting out in photography, it's easy to fall into the trap of "my photos suck --> therefore I need to buy better gear." This rarely fixes the problem. The reason is that the problems you are seeing usually aren't the result of gear, they are a reflection of your inexperience as a photographer.
The thoughtful responses to these gear questions (as seen in this thread) are often "what is wrong with the gear you already have? What are you hoping to gain with an upgrade?" These are the right responses, but the problem is that you may not have enough experience to be able to answer them. All you know is that you aren't happy with your images but don't really know why. Which is why you thought a gear upgrade would make them better and prompted you to post in the first place.
The real answer (as also posted in this thread) is that you need to learn the fundamentals of photography. You need to understand the basics of exposure: aperture, shutter speed, and ISO. And how changing any of these will impact your image. You also need to learn about composition (like the rule of thirds, leading lines, etc.). And about light. It's only when you have a good sense for these basic elements that you can know how your current gear is not letting you capture what you want to capture.
Read (either in books or online). And then shoot more, shoot more, shoot more with the gear you have. Try to ask yourself why you *don't* like a particular photo you took. Or the opposite, why you *do* like a particular photo you took. Post your photos online asking for feedback and advice (such as here in dedicated threads you start or in the POTD thread).
Best of luck
Well said
Some of my best photos were taken with my crappiest gear.
Hi,
Thanks for all the replies. I will have to take a couple hours and read. I understand. Yes, I begin but I love taking good pictures.
I will try and understand all the exposure, iso, aperture, etc. Take the same picture, with different setting and then compare them on the computer.
Thanks
Thanks for all the replies. I will have to take a couple hours and read. I understand. Yes, I begin but I love taking good pictures.
I will try and understand all the exposure, iso, aperture, etc. Take the same picture, with different setting and then compare them on the computer.
Thanks
You are thinking about this BACKWARDS. That's OK it is the #1 beginner mistake.
What you are doing is thinking first about photo equipment. Here you ask about flash and in the very first post you ask about lenses. That is BACKWARDS
You should be asking about images. How can I create a "look" that you want? How can I remove some of the high contrast I'm getting in images of people? How can I get rid of the background? Then some times the answer involves buying something, But many times the answer is to walk to a different location before to take the picture or maybe you can use some fill-in flash or maybe you are indoors and can use bounce flash?
About wireless flash. FIRST question is what is going to hold the flash unit? Will you use a tripod or light stand? How far is the light from the camera? Why cn't you use a cord. Cords are always more reliable. OK maybe you have a studio and don't want people tripping of flash sync cords? Maybe you are hand holding the camera using tripod mounted flash units and don't like a cord on the camera. But you see FIRST you states the problem (models trip over cords) then you find solution. (tape cord to floor with gaffer tape and place sand bags over tripod legs.) Wireless might not solve the problem because they still trip over the tripod legs. An architecture photographer might need wireless so he can hide flashes on the far side of a room for interior shots because he can't hide three 50 foot cords.
Start with the PROBLEM.
For example going back to your 35mm f/1.8 lens. Why would you replace it with a 50mm f/1.8? Well perhaps you say "I want a more pleasing and formal perspective in head and shoulders portrait shots, my 18-55 at 50 give this but I need a wider f-stop. OK then buying a 50mm is a no-brainer because it solves a problem. But without a problem to solve you don't need any more gear.
Using flash is about a lot more than using an equivalent ISO- high-ISO doesn't allow you to choose where the highlights and shadows fall on your subject- which is much, much more important than a technically correct exposure. Especially if you're trying to create art rather than document. Learning to shape and control light is an art and the way to create much more compelling images than you can by changing camera settings.
Paul
I agree with everything you wrote. As often happens in threads like these relating to a beginning photographer asking for gear advice, the thread gets somewhat derailed along the way. The real answer to the original post is that the OP needs to spend the time learning about the fundamentals of photography before thinking about buying more gear.
Flash got thrown into the thread which further muddied the waters. Doing flash "well" is a fairly advanced photographic technique. Before one starts worrying about on-camera flash vs off-camera flash vs wired flash vs wireless flash one should really take the time to learn the fundamentals of photography.
Your advice about identifying the problem before purchasing gear is spot on. However I don't think the OP is currently in a place to be able to identify the problem. And that is the *real* problem that needs to be addressed before going into the minute details of gear choices.
The OP needs to put in the time and effort to learn the fundamentals. Only then will some of the comments in this thread make any sense. Only then will he be able to "see" the problem and then ask for advice on how to solve it (either with different gear or with different technique).
Of course using a flash is an art of its own, but on the first steps of a DSLR, I would suggest for anyone to first understand how to get the most light of the camera, and then if they cannot achieve that, that should learn about how to use a flash.
I am not suggesting the not use of a flash all together, but in these early steps, you should first understand how the light works, and then move to a flash if you cannot get the results you need.
After all if you do not understand how light works, how would you understand how to use a flash?
Flash - not all bad
The converse is true, understanding flash can make you think much more systematically about natural light and in particular looking at all the different angles of light on the face can tell you a lot about how you might photograph without flash. We all have different ways of learning.
There have been some quite forthright opinions on this thread, but there are no absolutes in learning to be a photographer and making mistakes and experimenting is great fun and costs so little now we are not paying for film and processing. There is a pleasure in being able to afford new equipment and to make choices good and bad is part of that process.
The converse is true, understanding flash can make you think much more systematically about natural light and in particular looking at all the different angles of light on the face can tell you a lot about how you might photograph without flash. We all have different ways of learning.
There have been some quite forthright opinions on this thread, but there are no absolutes in learning to be a photographer and making mistakes and experimenting is great fun and costs so little now we are not paying for film and processing. There is a pleasure in being able to afford new equipment and to make choices good and bad is part of that process.
By experimenting. If all you know how to do is turn your ISO up, how will you ever learn anything? Increasing the gain on the amplifier coming off of the sensor doesn't help with anything other than documentation- and if you're thinking "What setting should I use?" instead of "What image do I want to end up with?," I submit that you're doing it wrong unless you simply want to document an event.
People keep throwing out "advanced" and "beginner" like there's some high dark art involved here. The *quickest* way from mediocre photographs to good photographs is to understand and control the light whenever and wherever that's possible. It could take days, it could take weeks, depending on how complicated you want to get, it could even take months. Reading "Light: Science and Magic", browsing strobist.blogspot.com, McNally's books or throwing on a flash and playing around, or just Googling things like "Fill flash," and "Dragging the shutter" are all relatively short-term ways to start down the path. The path isn't only days, weeks or months long, but getting acceptable, repeatable, controllable images is.
What's one of the first things someone can do to improve an outdoor portrait? Fill flash. Even with a camera that has 3D metering and matrix-balanced fill flash settings, I find I can often do much better manually-- but I couldn't do that if I just point the camera and push the button every time.
It's like the photographer who proudly proclaims, "I only shoot NATURAL light!" when indeed they mean "I don't know how to light things so the lighting doesn't get in the way of the image." The longer someone waits to use flash and reflectors, the longer it will take them to understand even natural light.
People who expect the camera to do all the work get mostly snapshots.
Paul
So you advice for someone to start using a flash even if they do not know what aperture, shutter or ISO do? Not a good advice to be honest. What good is it to use a flash if you do not know what different picture you get with wider or narrower aperture or slower or faster shutter? DOnt you think that someone should try first to understand how their camera works? I believe what you are proposing is the definition for only taking snapshots, or maybe you hadn't understood what I was talking about when you quoted me
Last edited:
I wonder why this is? It is nearly 100% universal too. EVERY beginner asks about gear and lenses as if that would some how make their pictures better. The more logical question would be "I want this kind of look, what can I get it."
In my experience with beginners the only new photographers who ask about a certain "look" are teen age girls. They want the image and hope not to have to buy anything. Older men on the other hand just want the shiny new gear and images are secondary.
Not really true. A _closer_ light will give a softer effect. The main reasons to get the camera off-flash are (a) to have the light off of the lens axis to avoid poor reflections in the subject's eyes and (b) to control the direction of the light.
Paul
----------
TheOP has already stated a willingness to try different exposure settings and compare the images- but they have expressed a desire to do portraiture, and the best way to get good portraits is to light the subject well. That's the best thing they can do that's not involved with posing. I've yet to see a professional portrait photographer go "Oh, nevermind the lights, I'll just crank up the ISO and open up the lens!" Personally, I shoot almost all my studio portraits around f/8.
Paul
----------
You can use a clothes steamer, or simply use a spray bottle of water on the backdrop and some clamps to hold it tight against the background stand, and the wrinkles will go away as the background dries.
Paul
I think it is somewhat human nature. Many (though not all) beginning photographers started with a phone camera or a cheap point-and-shoot. "Something" made them decide they wanted/needed something better. Maybe having a kid? Maybe looking at photos in books/magazines/online and wanted their photos to be closer to those photos? Maybe having a hobby (like cars or bugs) and wanting to create "good" images for this? Maybe wanting their vacation photos to look more like what they see in magazines? Maybe wanting to shoot portraits that are "as good" as paying a portrait photographer? Who knows? They buy an entry DSLR with a kit lens and either find it works or that it doesn't. When it doesn't work, that's harder. Not knowing anything about the technical details of photography, the easiest answer is that it's because they didn't spend enough. Comparing their photos to photos on-line, everyone is using better gear. So they start reading forums or review sites and everything they see lambasts their gear and says it is crap. "Kit lenses, who uses kit lenses?" "Kit lenses are crap." Okay, I made the plunge to get a DSLR, but I made a poor choice--the body I chose isn't that good, maybe I need to step up to a better body? Or for the more thorough (and savvy!) internet reader--bodies are crap ways to spend money. It's all about lenses. So being the smart shopper and internet reader, I need to invest in better lenses. Marketing exaggerates/enforces this attitude (for obvious reasons).
Nowhere in any of this calculus does the average novice pause and ask: "Maybe there is more to this photography thing than just pointing my camera at something and clicking the shutter." The easy answer is that by spending more money I can still do what I am currently doing but magically create better images.
Paul,
The reason I made the distinction between beginner and advanced techniques *wasn't* to say that you can't learn photography using flash. You obviously can and there might be a valid argument for going this route, at least for some people. For a real beginner though, buying more gear may not be the best advice starting off. I may be wrong, but I think learning to use what you have makes the most sense. Almost any entry DSLR has a built-in flash. Use it. Gain experience by using it as to why it can work as a fill flash, but other flash options are better for other scenarios. For most beginners, I *don't* think suggesting that they purchase an off-camera flash should be the first step before they know anything about photography. Moving from a phone/point-and-shoot to off-camera flash with separate stands for the strobe(s) is kind of a big step. Even using reflectors (which are much cheaper) may not be something that a truly novice photographer is willing to bother with. For truly novice photographers, convenience matters. Once you start throwing in extra elements (like an off-camera flash, or a tripod), some novices may just call it quits. Certainly not true for everyone (some may actually love the managing of all these little details and it might add something to the experience), but many novices want the shooting experience simple but with stellar resultant images. Which is why they opted for the body/lens upgrade in the first place....
The answer for any beginning photographer is that at some point you have to put in the time to learn about photography. Some of this is "shoot more, shoot more, shoot more." Some of this involves learning about the fundamentals. But I don't think the answer is ever as simple as "buy more gear." You are right that photography isn't a "dark art." But for a novice it can sure seem that way
Last edited:
Paul,
The reason I made the distinction between beginner and advanced techniques *wasn't* to say that you can't learn photography using flash. You obviously can and there might be a valid argument for going this route, at least for some people. For a real beginner though, buying more gear may not be the best advice starting off. I may be wrong, but I think learning to use what you have makes the most sense. Almost any entry DSLR has a built-in flash. Use it. Gain experience by using it as to why it can work as a fill flash, but other flash options are better for other scenarios. For most beginners, I *don't* think suggesting that they purchase an off-camera flash should be the first step before they know anything about photography. Moving from a phone/point-and-shoot to off-camera flash with separate stands for the strobe(s) is kind of a big step. Even using reflectors (which are much cheaper) may not be something that a truly novice photographer is willing to bother with. For truly novice photographers, convenience matters. Once you start throwing in extra elements (like an off-camera flash, or a tripod), some novices may just call it quits. Certainly not true for everyone (some may actually love the managing of all these little details and it might add something to the experience), but many novices want the shooting experience simple but with stellar resultant images. Which is why they opted for the body/lens upgrade in the first place....
The answer for any beginning photographer is that at some point you have to put in the time to learn about photography. Some of this is "shoot more, shoot more, shoot more." Some of this involves learning about the fundamentals. But I don't think the answer is ever as simple as "buy more gear." You are right that photography isn't a "dark art." But for a novice it can sure seem that way
I get where you're coming from, but if your main goal is portrait photography, different camera settings aren't going to help as much as lighting and posing. There's a reason that people who make their living doing portraits focus (NPI) on those things.)
I also think there's way too much "beginner" vs "advanced" foo being thrown about (and I'm not accusing you personally, you're generally quite reasonable) in threads like this that really don't challenge beginners to *advance* _their_ state of the art.
Certainly, changing to high-ISO hoping that a technical exposure is going to make them take better photographs is less likely than learning one or two conditions where flash works better for them. It's like the whole beginner vs advanced camera argument- it's mostly people who are frankly not comfortable getting outside their own comfort zone artificially trapping people inside that same zone.
Just like the "buy gear without a vision" thing, outside of documentary photography, taking portraits without lighting is sub-optimal, and if you don't get the camera setting changes after a couple of days or one good Google search, there's probably not a lot of technical exposure that'll help your images.
Even shooting birds, I always carry a Better Beamer- shooting portraits, I generally want three lights and modifiers- outside or inside, though outside, I'm happy with at least one light, a reflector and good sun.
In the studio shooting portraits, I'm either at f/8 or possible f/5.6 in aperture priority at base ISO- letting the camera worry about shutter speed. Doesn't matter if it's a pretty model, or death on a trike- the time setting up the lights is way more important than any exposure settings. Death just gets made into more CD covers
Paul
Hi,
Thanks for all the comments... I have found this website. Here is what I usually try to do. Take my baby in picture, inside the house, without much light.
That is my main project at the moment.
I use my d3200 with 18-55 and I am at 2-3 frets from her.
Is it my settings? I would like to not use a flash, since she sleep...
I understand that if I put more ISO, my picture will be grainy, is it my only option?
Thank you!
Thanks for all the comments... I have found this website. Here is what I usually try to do. Take my baby in picture, inside the house, without much light.
That is my main project at the moment.
I use my d3200 with 18-55 and I am at 2-3 frets from her.
Is it my settings? I would like to not use a flash, since she sleep...
I understand that if I put more ISO, my picture will be grainy, is it my only option?
Thank you!
Attachments
I think from what you have written so far, your money would be best spent on a book or two.
You have a pretty good range of kit there, and I think you are spending money on gear rather than learning to use what you have. (no offence meant)
The book 'understanding exposure' is usually highly recommended.
There are many others too of course, and a wide range of stuff on youtube and the like. I think MattGranger is pretty good, he has a nice enthusiasm for photography.
It is easy to fall into the trap of 'if I just had another lens/kit/gadget I will be able to take awesome photos.. but all you end up doing is taking high definition terrible shots.
Have a look at Doylem's stuff (he posts on here quite a bit) I think he uses a D200 and kit lens, yet his photos are some of the best I've ever seen
Apologies if I repeated things people have already said..but the six inches behind the camera are by a very great margin the most important thing.
Edit - Sorry, I seem to have skipped over the second half of this thread, and just read the first page..my comments seem a bit out of context.
One or two pictures of a sleeping infant are fine, 200 pictures of a sleeping infant aren't going to be compelling IMO. In the image you share there are two main lighting problems, and no camera setting is going to fix them:
1. The lighting is harsh, causing heavy shadows- unless your subject is moody and you want to express it (and the subject in this image hardly seems that,) harsh lighting isn't going to be good lighting. Either softer light, or earlier, more angled light will help, or finally more light on the subject to take out the shadows (you don't want to remove all shadows, but you can fill in the harsher ones with fill flash here and it would improve the image.) You could also use reflectors to fill in the shadows, but that's generally more difficult to do alone.
2. It's odd-- the light isn't coming from directly behind the photographer, but the subject looks to be squinting- bigger eyes make for friendlier-looking subjects, but more importantly, obvious catch lights in the eyes allow the viewer to "connect" with the subject. This bit of psychology is *critical* in images of live subjects. Fill flash again would allow for more visible catch lights, and improve the image significantly.
Personally, I wouldn't worry too much about flash waking a baby- unless they're very sensitive, they'll likely sleep through your attempts, and if they're asleep, you can work on positioning lights and reflectors. Cheap pieces of white and black foam core board coupled with lights are a cheap way to reflect and absorb light.
Paul
In almost all cases the camera' automatic mode works very well. Judgingfromthe photo your camera made a good exposure. The problem with the photo is the lighting. Photogrpagy, one you are past the level of quick "snapshots" is ALL about lighting. Either finding or creating light. Look in any studio and you see right way that the amour of lighting equipment FAR exceeds the amount of camera equipment. The professionals know what really matters and invest of what matters, the control of lighting
In the photo of the girl with the pinwheel you could have had an assistant hold a large white reflector to fill in the shadow side of the girl's face.
Lacking an assistant you can use fill-in flash. It is counter intuitive to many peole that you need flash on a bright sunny day. But what you need to watch is the RATIO of light to shadow Both the reflector and the fill-in flash are used to reduce the lighting ratio.
Look up "lighting ratio" in any intro type photo textbook or even try Google. That portent you made has a very high ratio. For children you'd want about a 1:2 or even lower ration and with very soft lights.
After "ratio" the softness os the light is the next concept. Technically this is the "anguar size of the light sours as seen from the subject's location" The sun is VERY tiny and therefor "hard" but in an over cast sky the clouds are the light source and are very big. Likelwise the white reflector your assistant holds is much larger than the sun (or has a larger apparent angular size)
Ok, bottom line. Forget about "camera settings" the green auto mode gets it right 85" of the time. It's "lighting" you need to learn. That is what matters more.