Helpless with a new camera!

[Madisonznana]

I need to be 'adopted' by a smart (yet speaks in easy terms), patient (oh very patient!!), teacher with a good sense of humor!! (to laugh with me, not at me when I make my mistakes) :rotfl2:
I love photos. I have wanted for years to be able to take great pictures and the last time we were at DL I was complaining to my husband that I kept getting the backs of characters because my camera was too slow.
So Santa brought me a Sony Alpha 100. Along with Digital DSLR for Dummies and OMG I seem to be dumber than dummies!! :scared1:
There seems to be so much to learn. I have been so spoiled with P & S cameras. But I want to learn to capture so much more. I already told my DH that in the next week or so I want to take a just me trip to DL and play. We live just a little over an hour away and have AP. Not have to worry about rides or taking pictures of DGD princess:
Should I just start with the auto focus portion of the camera, or go right into manual modes ? again :scared1:.
I have not been able to find any classes in my area and we are going on the Disney Magic this coming May so I want to really know how to use it well.
Apertures and F stops and long exposures, etc....::worried: any and all help would be greatly appreciated.

[Lizziejane]

If you don't mind, may I tag along on your thread here, as I am in exactly the same position?!

I think you came up with a great concept here - an experienced photographer "adopting" a beginner - giving us weeky tips and then perhaps assignments. I know there are other boards where assignments are dished out to "beginners". But looking at those photos, even the "beginners" are darned good by my standards! Those beginner boards just aren't beginner enough.

[Madisonznana]

Tips and assignments sounds like a great idea!! Please someone mold me into a photographer!!:rotfl2:

Great idea Lizzie!

[ukcatfan]

Should I just start with the auto focus portion of the camera, or go right into manual modes ?

I do not have the time to officially adopt, but here is my help.

I believe that you are actually talking about auto exposure modes. The auto focus will work in all modes. Most people start learning by using the program mode. It is usually shown on the dial as "P". It allows you to let the camera do most of the work, but you still have some say to it unlike full auto. Usually you can control if there is a flash or not and the ISO speed. The ISO speed is pretty much the same thing as it was with film. The higher the number, the more sensitive it is. Higher also means more noise though, so the higher settings should be used as needed.

Pay attention to what the camera is doing in program mode and try to sort of remember what the camera selects for certain situations. I would then move on to some aperture priority shots. This allows you to control the depth of field (DOF) for the shot. In case I am talking stuff you do not know, the DOF is the area that is in focus on the shot. It can get very complicated if you really wanted to dig deep, but with digital, you can always try again if you do not like the results. Basically, when the aperture is wide open (small F/#) then you have a small DOF and need to use a faster shutter speed (camera will pick it for you in this mode). It uses a faster shutter b/c the opening is larger and letting in more light. The opposite is true for narrow apertures (high F/#). With those you have more DOF, but need a longer shutter speed. If the shutter gets too long, you might need a tripod to keep it steady. You also need a relatively fast shutter if your subject is moving.

Put it all together and you can see different situations call for different settings. If you want to concentrate on a person in a portrait and blur the background, then you would use a large aperture (remember this is a small F/#). Do not use too large of one though or only part of the face will be in focus. Another thing to remember is that the farther you are away from the subject, the DOF gets larger. Eventually it effectively becomes infinity. This is true at all apertures.

You have some time, so practice like crazy.

Kevin

[0bli0]

i could tell you about sunny 16, rule of thirds, and talk about the principals of DOF and how aperture affects photos, etc. - but to be honest you don't need to know it, yet.

the thing that is generally most complicated about dslrs is all of the various settings and features that many people don't use. one of the best ways to get used to the camera itself is to put it in one mode and shoot a bunch (like in the hundreds) of photos then have a look at the results. where people often fall apart is tryig to make up for changing conditions by changing modes or switching some setting. imho you'll learn far better by seeing what happens when things don't go the way you expected than if you tried to change something (such as ISO).

you will quickly see various charactistics: -shots getting blurry as there is less light
-sky overexposing/turning white behind subject
-background illuminated but subject not
-blown highlights
-when taking a shot at night - the subject is illuminated but the background is completely black
-etc.

so once you start to see what goes wrong in a given situation, you'll then have a need to work around that. that will follow by more experimentation.
once this happens, then you can really learn what various modes and settings do, and a lot about what the camera can do. you'll also learn a lot about yourself as a photographer.

as has been suggested, the 'P' mode is a great mode to start with. so definitely get out there and shoot. shoot things in the yard, things in the house, things at work, and so on.

in any event i'm happy to answer any questions you may have - as is, i believe, most everyone else on this board. we're a very friendly lot :)

[Lizziejane]

I think my problem is that I've been trying to play with too many settings to begin with. I did start with the P mode, and played with the ISO. However, I thought I was doing something wrong because all the shots were looking very similar to me. It that because the camera is adjusting everything else based on my ISO setting to give me the correct exposure? And because it's indoors, where the light is constant, there wouldn't/shouldn't be a noticeable difference?

I tried taking some outdoors today. We had about 12 inches of new snow (beautiful!) but it was far too cold to be out there more than a few minutes. The shots that I did take for the most part were overexposed in certain portions of them. I took about 12 pictures from the same spot, adjusting the Av, and when I reviewed them, there was one spot of ice that was glaring and reading as overexposed. What settings should I be playing with to avoid this when shooting snow?

[KaitlinsMom]

Someone posted this on another thread and I thought it was a really good place to start -

http://web.canon.jp/Imaging/enjoydslr/

Once you take a look at that, then you can kind of figure out what are you might like to concentrate on -

Karen

[ukcatfan]

I did start with the P mode, and played with the ISO. However, I thought I was doing something wrong because all the shots were looking very similar to me. It that because the camera is adjusting everything else based on my ISO setting to give me the correct exposure? And because it's indoors, where the light is constant, there wouldn't/shouldn't be a noticeable difference?

The shots should not look too different. It is trying to get the same exposure as you suspected. If you look at the shot details, you will notice differences in the shutter speed and aperture.


I tried taking some outdoors today. We had about 12 inches of new snow (beautiful!) but it was far too cold to be out there more than a few minutes. The shots that I did take for the most part were overexposed in certain portions of them. I took about 12 pictures from the same spot, adjusting the Av, and when I reviewed them, there was one spot of ice that was glaring and reading as overexposed. What settings should I be playing with to avoid this when shooting snow?

You will need to either change the exposure compensation or go to manual mode for snow. That is a very difficult situation. The white balance also likes to go crazy in snow, so RAW shooting in snow would allow you to fix it later if there are problems. I do not get too much snow down here in SW FL, so I do not have any recent experience. I had a very basic digital when I used to live in KY and exposure compensation was the only thing I could to to help the shot.

Kevin

[0bli0]

...I tried taking some outdoors today. We had about 12 inches of new snow (beautiful!) but it was far too cold to be out there more than a few minutes. The shots that I did take for the most part were overexposed in certain portions of them. I took about 12 pictures from the same spot, adjusting the Av, and when I reviewed them, there was one spot of ice that was glaring and reading as overexposed. What settings should I be playing with to avoid this when shooting snow?

snow is always tough at first, because the camera exposes evenly across the entire sensor. shooting RAW will give you some additional dynamic range to help prevent blown highlights, yet achieve reasonable detail on the intended subject. i typically increase the ISO to 400 or so to help soften shadows. i also compensate up a tad by dialing up the exposure compensation by 1 1/2 or 2 stops (in an averaged or weighted exposure) or exposing for the snow without any compensation. you might try metering off the sky and then adjust from there.

the other thing that is tricky is white balance. snow is generally equally balanced red/green/blue. so you may need to either ensure you have some white in the photo, shoot in 'daylight' white balance or create a custom white balance. otherwise the image can look unexplainably odd.

most importantly, use your Histogram!!!!!!!


in case you're thinking 'what the...???' because of the above paragraphs. here is a cheat guide:

- RAW gives you more leeway to brighten or darken individual areas in the shot using software.
- increased iso helps capture shadow detail better and softens dark areas a bit better
- a + 1 1/2 (or more, if necessary) exposure compensation will compensate for the camera trying to make snow gray
- white balance is kind of a tricky one to easily explain. basically the camera tries to decide what is white and changes the overall colour of the image to compensate. since snow isn't pure white, but the camera thinks it is, the colour can be off.
- the histogram is a chart that shows how well the image is exposed. the idea is to make sure you have bars that are a reasonable height across the range. typicall you will have a hump. you don't want big empty spaces in the chart. you typically want to shoot to the right - having good bars on the right side of the graph.

[jann1033]

if you have a custom white balance setting you can set it for snow...it ought to tell you how to do that in your manual...( mine you take a picture of clean white snow then put it in the wb but i imagine all are a little different) there was a thread earlier like NOv or so bout winter photography but i can't find it ...found it and embarrassingly enough i forgot i had started it...oh well here's the link and the article in the thread is very good
http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=1273072

you really need to just practice, read your manual and try things out,go to some photography websites and read up... just make sure they are digital cause i think some have been around since computers were invented.

didn't check the canon link but if it 's for the learning center it is a great free place to find things out( if it isn't... go to canon usa-products-eos cameras and there are tons of links on the right side of the page from dslr help to lens charts and 101 info) it deals with basics like shutter speed etc. and you can play with the buttons on your own camera while you learn.

and you can't be any more annoying than me and my addle brained dumb ??? and no one has banned me from the site yet( not sure how many "ignore" lists i'm on though:rotfl:) so ask questions when you need to...everyone here is nice about answering them or pointing you where you can find the info

[mabas9395]

I'm not familiar with the DSLR for Dummies book but Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson is well regarded as a good book for beginners.

Program mode is good for when you want to take a picture you want to keep, but if you have some time to just go out and practice, put the darn thing in full Manual! There is no better way to understand how shutter speed, aperture and ISO all work together. Put it in manual and practice until you are able to take a picture of something moving and freeze the action. Practice until you are able to put your subject in focus and blur out the back ground. That way, you will understand why the camera chose the settings it did in Program Mode and you can adjust them if necessary.

[Pea-n-Me]

Joining since I'm sort of in the same boat. I know for many that getting out and using the camera helps them learn, but I'm the type of person that has to know the "theory" before the "practice" (that's the nurse in me).

I pulled out an old digital photography book that I bought when I got my first digital camera several years ago, read it, then went out and bought two more books. For weeks I've had all three of them spread across my bed every night along with the manual from my new camera (S3) and my second camera that I keep in my purse. Darn it, I'm determined I'm going to learn this! :rolleyes1 (I wish now that I took photography in high school.)

The problem I'm finding is that all three books have things I like, and things I don't like about them. For instance, they are all lacking a definition of ISO, as in, what the letters actually stand for. They describe what it is, but not what it stands for. :confused3 They must not realize that's how my brain works (or maybe I'm reading the wrong books). You kind of have to go between all three to get what you need, and to have it all make sense. It's enough to make you crazy. I'm about to make cheat sheets to keep in my camera bag, LOL, because I'm having trouble keeping it all straight (like what settings to use for better depth of field, etc). Now granted, I know I can use the auto settings, but I really would like to know how to use the manual settings as well.

Anyway, I think it's finally coming together, and I'm at the point where I can play around a little bit and feel like I somewhat know why I'm doing what I'm doing and why things look the way they do. :thumbsup2 I can even follow most of the posts here on the Photography Board! :thumbsup2 :thumbsup2 :rotfl: Good luck to you too!

[Pea-n-Me]

deleted post

[ukcatfan]

For instance, they are all lacking a definition of ISO, as in, what the letters actually stand for. They describe what it is, but not what it stands for. :confused3 They must not realize that's how my brain works (or maybe I'm reading the wrong books).

I have a bad feeling that you are going to be let down on this one. It actually stands for "International Organization for Standardization" I know, it does not seem correct b/c that would be IOS, but it is. Here is a quote from Wikipedia and the page it came from:

Products named after ISO:
-Photographic film's sensitivity to light, its "film speed," is described by ISO 5800:1987. Hence, the film's speed is often referred to as its "ISO number."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Organization_for_Standardization

Unfortunately, it is pretty boring stuff.

Kevin

[mabas9395]

I have a bad feeling that you are going to be let down on this one. It actually stands for "International Organization for Standardization" I know, it does not seem correct b/c that would be IOS, but it is.

Actually, ISO is what they call the IOS but it doesn't stand for it. Elsewhere in wikipedia we read this:

"It is a common misconception that ISO stands for "International Standards Organization", or something similar. ISO is not an acronym; it comes from the Greek word ίσος (isos), meaning "equal". In English, the organization’s long-form name is "International Organization for Standardization", while in French it is called "Organisation internationale de normalisation." These initials would result in different acronyms in ISO’s two official languages, English (IOS) and French (OIN), thus the founders of the organization chose "ISO" as the universal short form of its name."


So long story short (too late). The ISO number replaced the ASA number (American Standards Association) in the late 80's. None of the letters in ISO or ASA have nothing to do with photography, they're just named after the organization who standardized the way to measure the sensitivity of film to light.

Its amazing what you can learn on the internet.

[ukcatfan]

It is the world’s bureaucracy in action :thumbsup2

I bet they are the real life of the party :rotfl2:

I can just hear the pick-up lines, "Did I ever tell you the story of how I decided to set film speeds with numbers instead of letters."

Kevin

[Madisonznana]

Okay, what I learned so far. Go out and play!:thumbsup2
Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson is a good starting book.
Histograms should be used.
"P" is a good place to start.
I haven't had the chance to just play yet. I hope to get time this week.
I have two other questions for now. For practice what is the best image size to use? L:10M, M:5.6M or S:2.5M , and is fine okay or should we go with Raw?
And 2nd, would we be able to post some pictures here occassionally and ask for honest critiques and suggestions?
Thank you for all of your help so far, some of it still sounds Greek for now, but I am sure with practice and your help I will learn this!!! I am very excited.

[ukcatfan]

For practice what is the best image size to use? L:10M, M:5.6M or S:2.5M , and is fine okay or should we go with Raw?
And 2nd, would we be able to post some pictures here occassionally and ask for honest critiques and suggestions?
Thank you for all of your help so far, some of it still sounds Greek for now, but I am sure with practice and your help I will learn this!!! I am very excited.

Using RAW is going to add more complication to the process. You can always do auto processing of them though and it just adds a little time. If you get into modifications, it can be very time consuming and complicated. There are many benefits to RAW, but time is not one of them. If you go with JPG, I would use the best setting you have. Even though you are practicing, you might get some real keepers and regret not using the high quality. Bad shots can always be deleted, so I would not worry about drive space.

Pictures are always welcome on this board. We love seeing everyone else's work. Be warned, some of the suggestions sometimes come across as being a little dry and scientific, but I promise you that the people we have hanging around here lately are a really good bunch, so there is nothing personal. Just don't ask which brand of DSLR they think is better :lmao:

Kevin

[Pea-n-Me]

Thanks for the ISO explanation, guys. :rotfl2:

[handicap18]

I love Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson. I use it often for reference. He has a great way with explaining (with examples) photography.

Photography can be as complicated as you want or as easy as you want.

Here is something I came across to illustrate apertures and f/stops. (my little tutorial for the day). In math when you see numbers with the "/" sign between them that means a fraction. Same thing with f/stops. Stops are numbers assigned to the size of the circle the aperture of the lens makes. F is for focal lenght. Focal length divided by the stop number equals the size (circumference) of the circle. Focal length is stated in milimeters (MM). Or how far the lens magnifies (18mm, 55mm, 70mm, 300mm etc...). Here are what f/stops look like when compared to each other. Notice (just like fractions), the bigger the number the smaller the circle:
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e234/handicap18/Misc%20Photo%20Gallery/Non-Digital%20Favorites/123di_aperture.gif
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e234/handicap18/Misc%20Photo%20Gallery/Non-Digital%20Favorites/123di_aperture.gif

The bigger circles let in more light and will give a very shallow Depth of field (DOF) (blury background to isolate the subject). The smaller circles let in less light and will give a very deep DOF (in focus background). If your nearsighted or know someone who is nearsighted, you'll find that squinting your eyes makes things more in focus. Your eyes are allowing in less light to help you see clearer. When I was a kid and got glasses I remember my doctor telling me that if I ever lost my glasses or broke them, but needed to see things in focus a quick fix is to stick a piece of paper with a pin then look though the pin hole. I've tried it many times and it works. Thus we have deeper depth of field with a big f/stop (aka big number, small hole).

[jann1033]

I love Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson. I use it often for reference. He has a great way with explaining (with examples) photography.

Photography can be as complicated as you want or as easy as you want.

Here is something I came across to illustrate apertures and f/stops. (my little tutorial for the day). In math when you see numbers with the "/" sign between them that means a fraction. Same thing with f/stops. Stops are numbers assigned to the size of the circle the aperture of the lens makes. F is for focal lenght. Focal length divided by the stop number equals the size (circumference) of the circle. Focal length is stated in milimeters (MM). Or how far the lens magnifies (18mm, 55mm, 70mm, 300mm etc...). Here are what f/stops look like when compared to each other. Notice (just like fractions), the bigger the number the smaller the circle:
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e234/handicap18/Misc%20Photo%20Gallery/Non-Digital%20Favorites/123di_aperture.gif
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e234/handicap18/Misc%20Photo%20Gallery/Non-Digital%20Favorites/123di_aperture.gif

The bigger circles let in more light and will give a very shallow Depth of field (DOF) (blury background to isolate the subject). The smaller circles let in less light and will give a very deep DOF (in focus background). If your nearsighted or know someone who is nearsighted, you'll find that squinting your eyes makes things more in focus. Your eyes are allowing in less light to help you see clearer. When I was a kid and got glasses I remember my doctor telling me that if I ever lost my glasses or broke them, but needed to see things in focus a quick fix is to stick a piece of paper with a pin then look though the pin hole. I've tried it many times and it works. Thus we have deeper depth of field with a big f/stop (aka big number, small hole).

very nice visual aid handicap...out of curiosity..do you know of any lenses that go past f/22( at least i think that's where mine stop)? thinking i usually worry about a large enough aperture but never the other way.

[handicap18]

very nice visual aid handicap...out of curiosity..do you know of any lenses that go past f/22( at least i think that's where mine stop)? thinking i usually worry about a large enough aperture but never the other way.

Thanks jann.

There are quite a few. I want to say (I don't have it in front of me right now) my 50mm f/1.8 goes up to f/29. I just ordered the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Macro and that goes to f/32 according to the specs. You'll probably find that small of an aperture on prime lenses only, but I could be wrong. I haven't actually looked into it.

[Steve's Girl]

you might try metering off the sky and then adjust from there.



First, I am going to apologize for my stupidity - I am so out of my league here! However, I will not learn anything by shamefully hiding in the corner, so could someone please explain how metering is done? Bryan Peterson talks about this a lot in his book "Understanding Exposure". I understand it in theory, but am not sure I understand it in practice.

[handicap18]

Thanks jann.

There are quite a few. I want to say (I don't have it in front of me right now) my 50mm f/1.8 goes up to f/29. I just ordered the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Macro and that goes to f/32 according to the specs. You'll probably find that small of an aperture on prime lenses only, but I could be wrong. I haven't actually looked into it.

Ok, I check 2 of my lenses. 18-70mm zoom goes to f/29 at the 70mm end. The 70-300mm I have goes to f/40 at the 300mm end. So I guess just about any lens could go very tiny. Haven't seen an f/64 yet though.

[0bli0]

First, I am going to apologize for my stupidity - I am so out of my league here! However, I will not learn anything by shamefully hiding in the corner, so could someone please explain how metering is done? Bryan Peterson talks about this a lot in his book "Understanding Exposure". I understand it in theory, but am not sure I understand it in practice.

don't worry about it - there are so many terms in photography that make it seem much more difficult than it really is. i apologise for not explaining in more detail. you don't need to use a meter - just use the meter that is built into your camera.

by 'metering off the sky', i mean setting the exposure for how bright the sky is at the time you're taking the photo. there are two ways you can do this. in the Canon world, there is something called 'Exposure Lock'. on my camera, it's on the '*' button, but i don't remember off the top of my head if i put it on that button through a custom setting.

anyway the exposure lock 'locks in' an exposure setting. so you merely point at the sky and press the exposure lock button - then point at your subject , focus, and shoot. then look at the image (or better yet the histogram) and see how your image is exposed.

the second way to do this is by pointing at the sky and press the button to focus. note in your head what the exposure (shutter speed and aperture) is in the viewfinder and then manually set the same exposure (shutter speed and aperture) in 'manual' mode while shooting your scene.

does that make sense?

[DueyDooDah]

Just don't ask which brand of DSLR they think is better :lmao:

Kevin

Good thought. We don't want to go there again. Besides, we all know it's ...

[gruZ]

Here (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=249006)is another very good basic tutorial. Some of it at the bottom is particular to Canon, but most of it is applicable to any camera!

Have fun!

[handicap18]

First, I am going to apologize for my stupidity - I am so out of my league here! However, I will not learn anything by shamefully hiding in the corner, so could someone please explain how metering is done? Bryan Peterson talks about this a lot in his book "Understanding Exposure". I understand it in theory, but am not sure I understand it in practice.

No need to apologize.

On the Nikon's there are 3 different meter area's. Metrix which takes just about all the area in the view finder and get an average based on info stored in the camera's computer chip. Center Point which is the bigger circle you see in the view finder and Spot which is the small circle you see in the view finder. I generally use center point or spot metering. You can change from one to the other in the menu (there may be a short cut on the D80, but I don't know for sure, check the users manual).

Using the meter in center point or spot you can fix the particular circle on the area you want to check for exposure, make not of it in the view finder or use the Exposure Lock button and re-compose. Or you can use the circle to get the meter reading then step back rather than zoom. When I take pictures of the moon with the 300mm end of my zoom I'll use spot metering as the circle is about the same size the moon is in the view finder.

[Steve's Girl]

by 'metering off the sky', i mean setting the exposure for how bright the sky is at the time you're taking the photo. there are two ways you can do this. in the Canon world, there is something called 'Exposure Lock'. on my camera, it's on the '*' button, but i don't remember off the top of my head if i put it on that button through a custom setting.

anyway the exposure lock 'locks in' an exposure setting. so you merely point at the sky and press the exposure lock button - then point at your subject , focus, and shoot. then look at the image (or better yet the histogram) and see how your image is exposed.

the second way to do this is by pointing at the sky and press the button to focus. note in your head what the exposure (shutter speed and aperture) is in the viewfinder and then manually set the same exposure (shutter speed and aperture) in 'manual' mode while shooting your scene.

does that make sense?

Yes! My camera does have an exposure lock button (called autoexposure lock). It works in P, S or A mode. The default setting for this button locks the exposure and focus. So, I have not used it much, but I just discovered that I can change this to lock exposure only. I actually read the whole manual, just can't remember 90% of it!

Using the second method, I need to meter in P mode (maybe S or A also?) and then switch to manual mode and use the settings the camera gave me? The light bulb just went on - ohhhh, you have to switch modes! No wonder I wasn't getting this.

No need to apologize.

On the Nikon's there are 3 different meter area's. Metrix which takes just about all the area in the view finder and get an average based on info stored in the camera's computer chip. Center Point which is the bigger circle you see in the view finder and Spot which is the small circle you see in the view finder. I generally use center point or spot metering. You can change from one to the other in the menu (there may be a short cut on the D80, but I don't know for sure, check the users manual).



There is a shortcut on the D80 - it is very easy to change by pushing a button and using the command dial. I just often forget because I am trying to adjust everything else correctly.

Thank you, thank you both of you! It is all coming together - just a little slowly at times!

[boBQuincy]

Here is a really good essay on exposure, how it works, and why everything in the image is not likely to be "properly" exposed.

http://luminous-landscape.com/columns/determining-exposure.shtml

RAW requires some work but if you set your camera to RAW+JPG you will get the JPG to look at right away and the RAW in case you get an image that you want to work on later (it could even be much later, RAW converters are improving all the time. I recently went back to some images I captured 5 years ago and made better conversions and prints from them).

The glaring part of the ice is almost always going to be outside of the range our cameras can capture unless the rest of the image is too dark. There are ways around this but they are advanced techniques (like HDR in Photoshop).

[MarkBarbieri]

very nice visual aid handicap...out of curiosity..do you know of any lenses that go past f/22( at least i think that's where mine stop)? thinking i usually worry about a large enough aperture but never the other way.

Don't be too quick to use a high f-stop. You get more depth-of-field, but you also start to suffer from diffraction problems. A shot taken at f/22 is going to be noticably less sharp than one taken at f/8. This is a basic physical limitation, so you can't spend your way around hthe problem. You've got trade off more diffraction for more depth-of-field. It's all about compromises.

[jann1033]

Here is a really good essay on exposure, how it works, and why everything in the image is not likely to be "properly" exposed.

http://luminous-landscape.com/columns/determining-exposure.shtml

RAW requires some work but if you set your camera to RAW+JPG you will get the JPG to look at right away and the RAW in case you get an image that you want to work on later (it could even be much later, RAW converters are improving all the time. I recently went back to some images I captured 5 years ago and made better conversions and prints from them).

The glaring part of the ice is almost always going to be outside of the range our cameras can capture unless the rest of the image is too dark. There are ways around this but they are advanced techniques (like HDR in Photoshop).

another great one, you get an A+ for the night!:woohoo: