DSLR Learning Curve - FRUSTRATED!

[AndrewWG]

No way, I can get lenses for my DSLR for 100 to 300 for some really great lenses. I have the pentax k100d. Love it. For real, I dont think you need to spend that much for a lens really, esp since you are still figuring it out. Im in the same stage you are. I took the camera and ran around the house and took shot after shot, at night, in the day. Then, I took shots out side, night and day as well. When I take a group of shots, I write down the settings I used for that group and what type of light I took them in and disntance as well. And catalog the shots. They are mostly throw away shots, all for learning, but I have learned so much, its insane, from here and from doing that.

Oh, I would never pay (well maybe never) $1400 for a lens. This is a hobby, not a profession. I do think that the lenses in those price ranges are probably worth their weight in gold if you have the use for them and they are generating a fair amount of income for you. But for a hobby? Not a chance. I would be too worried that they would break to even use the things.

Andy

 

[Master Mason]

I have 2 lenses that cost over 1K, the difference is the optics and the speed. Both of mine are f/2.8 toughout the range they are L, which means they are the very best glass, and are weather and dust sealed.

And they are pretty much lifetime type purchases, unless I do something really stupid with them, they will still be serving me well as long as I am able to take pictures. Or until tomorrow's technology makes the existing lenses obsolete, which no one currently see's on the horizon.

The reason to spend that much money is when your current lens can not get you the pictures you want. In my case, I like to shoot low light with no flash, for that I need the faster lenses.

 

[ukcatfan]

DH is darling (dear?) husband
DD is darling (dear?) daughter
DW is darling (dear?) wife
etc, etc, etc....

Lens that cost $1400? Many from what I've seen. Check out some of the lenses on Amazon.com and you will be amazed at how much they can cost! $1400 is cheap for some of them...

Andy

You are way off...
Around here the first "D" is obviously for Disney
DD - Disney Daughter
DW - Disney Wife
DS - Disney Son
DMIL - Disney (well you won't get me to say those dirty words, but you get the picture)



Kevin

 

[tinksdad]

Oh, I would never pay (well maybe never) $1400 for a lens. This is a hobby, not a profession. I do think that the lenses in those price ranges are probably worth their weight in gold if you have the use for them and they are generating a fair amount of income for you. But for a hobby? Not a chance. I would be too worried that they would break to even use the things.

Andy

Never, say never..... Those high priced lenses are expensive for a reason. They are better!! Not to say the less expensive ones won't give a reasonable or good photo, they will. But the good stuff is amazing.

 

[GrumpyOne]

Actually, if you shoot using JPG vs. RAW, then you may need to do little to none, just as in any p&s. Maybe some cropping. I think MM was referring to shooting RAW images.

This was one of the reasons I went with the K10D, if I don't like the way the pic came out I'll be able to make a change and have a new JPEG made. Don't like that one, make another change and out pops another JPEG. All while keeping the RAW image for processing in Photoshop if desired.

 

[GrumpyOne]

Oh, I would never pay (well maybe never) $1400 for a lens. This is a hobby, not a profession. I do think that the lenses in those price ranges are probably worth their weight in gold if you have the use for them and they are generating a fair amount of income for you. But for a hobby? Not a chance. I would be too worried that they would break to even use the things.

Andy

Everyone has a limit. If you're spending thousands already on that "once in a life-time" trip, what's more money to record images you wouldn't otherwise get?

 

[ukcatfan]

Shots that wouldn't be throw away with RAW, you mean? I guess I just don't understand that. Sorry for my confusion. I wish I had some RAW images to practice with before I make this jump...

Andy

I know that you are leaning towards Canon, but I will see what I can do to get some Pentax RAW files to you if you would like. I just do not know the easiest way to get them to you. Many e-mail servers reject messages that are too big, but we could try. Even if you do not currently have a RAW converter program, you could download a trial of something like Bibble. I got my test RAW images by taking my memory card to Circuit City and taking test shots with a few different models.

Kevin

 

[tinksdad]

Ok, I just replied to someone elses post about P&S cameras and I am missing my Canon G2. We moved up to a Nikon D200 (thanks to DH) and I can't tell if I'm having buyers remorse or if I just need to spend more time with my camera.

I never took photography in school so i'm trying to learn about f-stops, aperature, metering, and depth of field on my own. I was pretty good at controling these features with my Canon and getting the shots I wanted. With the D200 I am not getting the shots I want and it's really frustrating!

DH wants a new lens but I can't see throwing $1400 towards a new lens - when the equipment isn't the problem. ARG! Ok, Ok - I need to spend some quality time with my D200. Fiddle with all the knobs, change all the settings, and see what works.

Any good reference books to help me understand metering, DOF, all that jazz?

D4D

I'm a D200 user too. It's a great camera, but it "needs" you to be knowlegable and will not be as forgiving as the lesser cameras. Try just shooting in program mode for awhile to get the feel of the camera. Tweak the EV controls and learn about it's features. Then move on to apeture and/or shutter priority to further explore the cameras resources.

Take your time and shoot a lot!! Digital is cheap and if you don't like it upon review on your computer, trash it and reshoot. Try really tackling a subject and shooting lots of different angles and perspectives to get a real coverage of the shots.

 

[AKLforever]

I have 2 lenses that cost over 1K, the difference is the optics and the speed. Both of mine are f/2.8 toughout the range they are L, which means they are the very best glass, and are weather and dust sealed.

And they are pretty much lifetime type purchases, unless I do something really stupid with them, they will still be serving me well as long as I am able to take pictures. Or until tomorrow's technology makes the existing lenses obsolete, which no one currently see's on the horizon.

The reason to spend that much money is when your current lens can not get you the pictures you want. In my case, I like to shoot low light with no flash, for that I need the faster lenses.

That is the primary reason I bought this camera!! I was so frustrated with PnS cameras at low light, I gave them up. I have the 50mm 1.4 lens for my pentax and man, does it make a difference. So, those lenses you have a great for low light you say? Damn, I need to save up before going to disney again, hehehe. I want a zoom lens with a low fixed F. Thats gunna hurt, hehe.

 

[Master Mason]

That is the primary reason I bought this camera!! I was so frustrated with PnS cameras at low light, I gave them up. I have the 50mm 1.4 lens for my pentax and man, does it make a difference. So, those lenses you have a great for low light you say? Damn, I need to save up before going to disney again, hehehe. I want a zoom lens with a low fixed F. Thats gunna hurt, hehe.

True,

But I also have a few other lenses that cost over 1K combined. If I knew then what I know now, I could have saved a grand by not purchasing lenses that didn't fit my needs. So it is a live and learn thing, and If I can help someone to not make the same mistakes that I made, then all the better.

These lenses are certainly not for everyone. There are 3rd party vendors such as sigma and tammoran (sp) that make very serviceable lenses at a fraction of the cost.

I just know me well enough to know that if I skimp the first time, I end up buying it twice, so I am always better to save and get what I want the first time.

I very seriously concidered the sigma 24-70 f/2.8, I read all the reviews, looked at all the pictures, and it is a very nice lens. But, I would have always been wishing I had bought the canon, that's just one of my charactor flaws I guess.

And while I like money as much as the next guy, having a few hundered extra bucks in my account has never made me one bit happier, having that lens on my camera while I take pictures, that makes me happy...

 

[AKLforever]

True,

But I also have a few other lenses that cost over 1K combined. If I knew then what I know now, I could have saved a grand by not purchasing lenses that didn't fit my needs. So it is a live and learn thing, and If I can help someone to not make the same mistakes that I made, then all the better.

These lenses are certainly not for everyone. There are 3rd party vendors such as sigma and tammoran (sp) that make very serviceable lenses at a fraction of the cost.

I just know me well enough to know that if I skimp the first time, I end up buying it twice, so I am always better to save and get what I want the first time.

I very seriously concidered the sigma 24-70 f/2.8, I read all the reviews, looked at all the pictures, and it is a very nice lens. But, I would have always been wishing I had bought the canon, that's just one of my charactor flaws I guess.

And while I like money as much as the next guy, having a few hundered extra bucks in my account has never made me one bit happier, having that lens on my camera while I take pictures, that makes me happy...

That 24-70 f/2.8 seems to me would be the a great, if not best prime lens to use all the time. Ok Ok, I understand now why D4Ds DH wants a killer expensive lens. Well, all I can say is this.

D4D, if you can get the money together, get the lens. If not, save up for it. And for now work on practicing raw developing on your PC. But either way, get a great lens at some point for a really good primary lens, and you will forget the woes you have now. Trust me on this.

 

[JR6ooo4]

I think my two lenses are in the medium price range:

canon 28-135 IS (image stabilization), and canon 70-300 IS, about $450 and $600. also the canon 50mm f1.8 for $80.

I think they are halfway between point and shoot quality, which is not that bad, and L lens quality.

Mikeeee

 

[Master Mason]

As an example of what a little PP will do

As shot, no processing

As I processed it. This took me less that 1 minute in Lightroom. I am still learning, so I sure others could have made it even better, but not bad for a snapshot off the pier.

 

[AndrewWG]

I know that you are leaning towards Canon, but I will see what I can do to get some Pentax RAW files to you if you would like. I just do not know the easiest way to get them to you. Many e-mail servers reject messages that are too big, but we could try. Even if you do not currently have a RAW converter program, you could download a trial of something like Bibble. I got my test RAW images by taking my memory card to Circuit City and taking test shots with a few different models.

Kevin

Kevin,

I think that I can receive large e-mail attachments with comcast. I will PM you my e-mail address and we can give it a try. If not, I will go into Staples and see what they let me do with the XT.

Andy

 

[SharonLowe]

Understanding Digital Photography[/U] by Bryan Peterson (he also has Understanding Exposure, which overlaps this book in many ways, but both are good to have). This book contains excellent, easy-to-read info that may help you get better shots. It will surely help you learn what the terms/jargon mean.

In addition to Bryan's great books (I actually helped him write the Understanding Digital book), he offers on line classes. Here is the url:

http://www.ppsop.com/

Another great place for a beginning online photo class is here:

http://www.betterphoto.com

Bryan taught there before he started his own photo school. I took several classes there and they are quite good at a reasonable cost.

It is best to start simply and try to learn one new feature at a time. Once you feel you have mastered one item, move on to the next. What matters most in the end is your eye and then being able to use the camera to create what you are visualizing. And, of course, at least some processing will be required. I'm impressed by Lightroom for some things but feel that Photoshop (either Elements or CS3) allow the most flexibility since you cannot make anything other than global adjustments in Lightroom.

 

[Ducky4Disney]

Thank you for all the support and helpful hints.

We have an 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G ED-IF AF-S DX Zoom Nikkor lens right now. Not a bad lens at all (but what do I know). DH wants an 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED AF VR Zoom-Nikkor lens - that's $1400, baby.

As for shooting RAW vs JPG - I shot RAW with my G2 and wasn't that impressed with what I could do with it. I found that the pics didn't need a lot of post-processing. Maybe I'm doing it wrong; I probably am. What are some of the good RAW image processing programs out there? I shoot in JPG and still run them through PhotoShop for a once over.

Thanks for the suggestion with the Canon! I loved my Canon and at one point considered the Pro1S (whatever happened to that one?).

D4D

 

[boBQuincy]

Ok, I just replied to someone elses post about P&S cameras and I am missing my Canon G2. We moved up to a Nikon D200 (thanks to DH) and I can't tell if I'm having buyers remorse or if I just need to spend more time with my camera.

I never took photography in school so i'm trying to learn about f-stops, aperature, metering, and depth of field on my own. I was pretty good at controling these features with my Canon and getting the shots I wanted. With the D200 I am not getting the shots I want and it's really frustrating!

DH wants a new lens but I can't see throwing $1400 towards a new lens - when the equipment isn't the problem. ARG! Ok, Ok - I need to spend some quality time with my D200. Fiddle with all the knobs, change all the settings, and see what works.

Any good reference books to help me understand metering, DOF, all that jazz?

D4D

As usual, I will take a different approach and recommend Ansel Adams "The Camera" and "The Negative". These books contain all we need to know about camera settings and exposure, and even though they were written in the film days the ideas still apply. Film, P&S, SLR, it is all the same concepts.

Fiddling with knobs and settings is one way to learn but it is probably the least efficient way. Reading a book and learning what the settings do should give much quicker results.

RAW is what the camera captures, JPG is derived from the RAW. The RAW image will always be as good or better (usually better) than the JPG since you decide what is important as compared to some progam in the camera deciding. If you are uncomfortable with converting the RAW then use RAW + JPG for now, so you have the JPG today and the RAW for the future.

Good lenses can make a difference, a camera support often makes even more of a difference (at far less cost).

 

[jann1033]

Oh, I would never pay (well maybe never) $1400 for a lens. This is a hobby, not a profession. I do think that the lenses in those price ranges are probably worth their weight in gold if you have the use for them and they are generating a fair amount of income for you. But for a hobby? Not a chance. I would be too worried that they would break to even use the things.

Andy

lets see how long this mindset lasts i said i'd never pay over $400 only 6 months ago ( still not up to the $1000 range but it is approaching faster than i like to admit) unfortunately i do think some of the good lenses cost more so it depends on how fanatical you get about it ( i'm up to the f.a.n.a.t.)

 

[jann1033]

True,

But I also have a few other lenses that cost over 1K combined. If I knew then what I know now, I could have saved a grand by not purchasing lenses that didn't fit my needs. So it is a live and learn thing, and If I can help someone to not make the same mistakes that I made, then all the better.

These lenses are certainly not for everyone. There are 3rd party vendors such as sigma and tammoran (sp) that make very serviceable lenses at a fraction of the cost.

I just know me well enough to know that if I skimp the first time, I end up buying it twice, so I am always better to save and get what I want the first time.

I very seriously concidered the sigma 24-70 f/2.8, I read all the reviews, looked at all the pictures, and it is a very nice lens. But, I would have always been wishing I had bought the canon, that's just one of my charactor flaws I guess.

And while I like money as much as the next guy, having a few hundered extra bucks in my account has never made me one bit happier, having that lens on my camera while I take pictures, that makes me happy...

i totally agree here...every cheap( don't mean inexpensive necessarily but i mean less quality) lens i have bought i want the better one anyway. they are ok for interim but i really am trying to save the money on the first cheap one i buy and end up not wanting to use anyway and just waiting till i can get the one i will keep and use.

 

[photo_chick]

As usual, I will take a different approach and recommend Ansel Adams "The Camera" and "The Negative". These books contain all we need to know about camera settings and exposure, and even though they were written in the film days the ideas still apply. Film, P&S, SLR, it is all the same concepts.

Whoa, old school! I have those on my shelf, in fact they were the first photography books I bought about 20 years ago. Still open them up on occasion.

I am a big fan of Photography by Upton and London myself. Of course the fact that I stupidly spent the $$$ for a new copy way back when might be why. (must get moneys worth!) OR it could be because it was my textbook for a few classes and I am comfortable with it. I have been told (too lazy to go find out) the newer versions have a section on digital, though my copy is pre-digital.