Beginner's attempt...

[idowhat_i_want]

I took these with a Canon G10. I now have Canon Rebel XS... no fancy lenses and flash at the present moment. C+C :) (especially anyone with the same camera as me!)

1)
http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e291/sweetrizen/IMG_0069.jpg
2)
http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e291/sweetrizen/IMG_0283.jpg
3)
http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e291/sweetrizen/IMG_0289.jpg
4)
http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e291/sweetrizen/IMG_0393.jpg
5)
http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e291/sweetrizen/IMG_0408.jpg
6)
http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e291/sweetrizen/IMG_0409.jpg
7)
http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e291/sweetrizen/Img_0418.jpg

[Disassociation]

Cute kitty :)

#1 seems focused inappropriately, when shooting people/animals generally try to focus on the eyes. The background and her left paw appear to be the most 'in focus' portion of the photo, when the subject (your kitty) should be. Lighting also seems a little funny with the foreground shadowed a bit, but not enough for a dramatic effect, just seems like the window off to the right was open creating odd shadows.

#2 suffers the same way, but focus seems to be even further off, I can't really see what is in focus. Another cute kitty though :)

#3 is an interesting shot, you can still read the text even with softening on it and the key seems to be the sharpest portion. Did you specifically want the key to be in focus? I would have likely chosen the words on the key chain as long as the key was still distinguishable.

#4 is a cute puppy but the photo seems over exposed a bit. Such a sad/solemn look on pups face, poor guy :) Better framing/focus on this then the first two shots though, the eyes are much more in focus here :)

#5 looks overexposed, with a lot of post-production done to enhance the colour of the flower artificially. The pixelation seems to back this up, but it could simply be a tight crop showing the original pixels more too? The core of the flower is indistinguishable due to the brightness.

#6 the red is unfortunately a little over saturated, creating a very bright photo, but loosing so much of the flowers details. In print this would likely look like a huge red mass. Possible issues with the white balance as well, based on the white spots in the middle of the red being bluey. Much less pixelation here then number 5 but the focus is quite soft too.

#7 The background tiles have an odd greyish-green tint to them that kinda sours things. The bug is as in focus as the rest of the shot but if you could have had him more in focus that would have been better. It looks like there was a lot of post production here based on the colour scheme?

I'm really sorry if I came off harsh :( I figured it was better to point out the things I noticed then simply not reply at all, since this is the comments section. I think these types of photos are rather common with any point-and-shoot camera though. On your Rebel XS did you get the 18-55mm w/ IS lens as the kit? Thats a great lens no matter what people say :) You should try the same shots again with that combo!

[idowhat_i_want]

... I'm really sorry if I came off harsh :( I figured it was better to point out the things I noticed then simply not reply at all, since this is the comments section. I think these types of photos are rather common with any point-and-shoot camera though. On your Rebel XS did you get the 18-55mm w/ IS lens as the kit? Thats a great lens no matter what people say :) You should try the same shots again with that combo!

I APPRECIATE your critiques very much. I didn't come off harsh at all! It's the only way i'll learn, really. Excellent observations you've pointed out. Thank you!

With the rebel xs, it gives me a lot more control of where I want the focus. With the other one, I just had to go along with what it wanted to focus on.

Again, thank you!

[chopper5654]

looks like some of the flower shots are cropped too tightly, as well. the noise is pretty noticeable.

i have an XSi and both "kit" lenses. which lens did you use? the 18-55mm? and, how close to the flowers were you?

[idowhat_i_want]

looks like some of the flower shots are cropped too tightly, as well. the noise is pretty noticeable.

i have an XSi and both "kit" lenses. which lens did you use? the 18-55mm? and, how close to the flowers were you?

Unfortunately, with these ones, i didn't use my rebel XS. I used the powershot G10. I will try to retake these photos with the Rebel XS (18-55mm lens. Mine only came with that one lens). Thank you for your helpful eye!

[chopper5654]

i prefer to shoot macro-type stuff with the 250mm at its minimum distance at 3 ft to get the bokeh as nice as possible. but, i will occasionally shoot with the wider lens at a foot. its just that a 55mm lens, at f/5.6, isnt going to blur much of anything....at least not completely out like nice macro shots do.

macro is fun, but i am trying to play to the lens' strengths. and, from what i can tell, the 18-55 kit lens is a great lens for some landscapes, night shots with long exposures, and portraits....your basic touristy stuff. it seems to be a basic lens that will let the "body" give us the options to play as we learn/re-learn the SLR world. the 55-250 does a lot more of the same, but with more reach. and, i use it some for what little birding/wildlife/macro i can do.

if we want to do more specialized stuff in the photography world, i think we need to pony up and buy some more specialized lenses. however, at least we have a decent start to play around with and see WHERE we would like to specialize before buying the gear. if that makes sense.

[idowhat_i_want]

i prefer to shoot macro-type stuff with the 250mm at its minimum distance at 3 ft to get the bokeh as nice as possible. but, i will occasionally shoot with the wider lens at a foot. its just that a 55mm lens, at f/5.6, isnt going to blur much of anything....at least not completely out like nice macro shots do.

macro is fun, but i am trying to play to the lens' strengths. and, from what i can tell, the 18-55 kit lens is a great lens for some landscapes, night shots with long exposures, and portraits....your basic touristy stuff. it seems to be a basic lens that will let the "body" give us the options to play as we learn/re-learn the SLR world. the 55-250 does a lot more of the same, but with more reach. and, i use it some for what little birding/wildlife/macro i can do.

if we want to do more specialized stuff in the photography world, i think we need to pony up and buy some more specialized lenses. however, at least we have a decent start to play around with and see WHERE we would like to specialize before buying the gear. if that makes sense.

It makes absolute sense. I have the 18-50mm lens because i'm just learning this new camera and using a digital SLR. Of course, I will soon invest in lenses, especially a macro lens. From what you say, the 55-250 seems like a wise choice as well.
Thank you for your feedback!

[chopper5654]

i'll see if i can get a link to the 55-250mm forum to see what the lens has done in better hands. it convinced me to spend the extra $200 and get both lenses when i bought my camera back in january. WELL WORTH IT!!!

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=459569&highlight=55-250+IS

i have found the lens to be a little soft, but most of that is my technique, too. i had to learn the little "rule" about matching the focal length with the shutter speed. for instance, a 250mm lens most likely needs to be on a tripod on shutters less than 1/250...in my case, 1/320. i used to be super steady, but not anymore...apparently.

if you dont mind, here is one of my faves from this spring with the 55-250mm. the image is actually pretty sharp. mine rarely post well for some reason...

http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/4153/img1903amedium.jpg