Welcome,
This is a little guide I feel compelled to put together to help you sort through some of the bad advice that is occasionally typed up on these forums. Remember, "Certain Responses Are Pitiful" ... or C.R.A.P. for short.
And Mods, this is not "drunken posting" or someone looking to make personal attacks, I'm going to name no one here ... I'm simply telling it like it is and trying to offer up good advice because there seems to be a lot of newbies around here these past couple of weeks.
Anyway. Rule number 1: Photography is about light. Simple isn't it? Everything is about the light. Harsh light is bad, light from below is bad, direct flash light is bad, soft diffused light from relatively natural angles is good. Learn about light and your photography will improve exponentially. The only place that photography becomes about the equipment is when you're making a print that is going to be plastered in anything larger than a poster size or you're shooting sports/action photography.
Rule number 2: Shutter speed is your friend. That's the quest really, for more shutter speed. You can have the best lighting in the world but if there isn't enough of it and you don't have a tripod .... your shots will probably come out blurry. This is called motion blur. Grab a pair of binoculars and look through them ... the image is shaky isn't it? That's the inevitable shake your hands do magnified by whatever power the binoculars are. Same holds true for a lens. Here's a really simple formula that you should know by heart:
For sharp HANDHELD photos, try to shoot at or faster than 1/xxxx of a shutter speed, where xxxx is the focal length you are shooting at times the crop factor (if you have one) of your camera. In other words, if you are shooting with a Canon 75-300 zoomed out to 200mm on a 350D which has a 1.6 crop, you will want to shoot no slower than 1/320th of a second. The lower the denominator (number on bottom), the slower the speed. Now, there are two exceptions to that rule. The first is that you should never EVER shoot below 1/60th of a second, regardless of focal length. The second is that some lenses incorporate an image stabilization feature than when utilized, will allow you to run much slower shutter speeds than what this formula provides for ... but that's for a different post.
Faster shutter speeds require more light. There are two ways to get more light ... add it artificially through extra lighting or a flash, or get a faster lens. When we say a "faster" lens, we mean one that has a lower F-number. F/5.6 or above is "painfully slow". F/4 is "slow". F/2.8 is "fast". F/1.8 is "blazing". Faster than F/1.8 is "ludicrous speed" (pls ignore the Spaceballs reference)
I won't get into depth of field in this particular thread because in general, the advice given on DOF is pretty decent on this board. Just keep in mind that depth of field is based on three things. Focal length, Aperture (F-stop), and distance from subject.
Anyway, light is your friend. If you don't have the seemingly endless budgets a lot of the amateurs on this board have, which prevents you from affording really fast zoom glass .. look into fast prime lenses (lenses that don't zoom) or get a cheap zoom and keep in mind that you need to be working with either a tripod or decent amounts of light.
Rule #3: "L" Lenses are GROSSLY overplayed on these forums. Here's what you pay for when you buy an "L" lense. You pay for more light, yes. The barrels of the lenses are larger (as is the glass) allowing for more light (faster speeds). The lenses are weather sealed to prevent them from getting the internals wet. The bodies are made of strong materials to withstand the rigors of professional abuse. The glass is coated better which helps prevent chromatic abberations, ghosting, and some flaring (which most of you wouldn't notice anyway). Ok, that's it. Notice that I didn't say that L lenses are made sharper. Yes, the quality control is a bit better, but the differences in sharpness between L glass and regular glass would only really show themselves in larger prints ... something larger than 11x14 which most of you won't print anyway.
As far as the sheer volume of "upgrade to L glass and your problems will disappear" advice, ignore it. Remember C.R.A.P.? There are a ton of people here who have considerably deeper pockets than they have ambition to "learn" (key word there) about taking good photos. Throwing money at it is to some, the answer. I don't know about most of you, but money does not grow on trees for me and unless I have a specific need that an L lens, and only an L lens, can fill, it's not economically feasible to purchase one. What is economically feasible is to post a picture, include the EXIF data, and let one of us who knows a thing or two about taking a decent photo answer your question. I apologize to all the people I've just offended (and judging by some of the signatures on this forum, there are a ton of you), but it's the truth. Deal with it.
Rule #4: Post processing is not NECESSARY. Remember one thing ... there are certain skills involved with taking quality photos. This includes simply taking sharp photos (which isn't as critical on the importance scale as one might think). Things like the quantity of caffeine in your body, body position, how you've braced yourself, how you depress the shutter (handgun/rifle shooters, you know exactly what I'm talking about) metering mode of camera (which can incorrectly affect exposure and therefore shutter speed), picking the correct exposure settings, and knowing the "sweet" spot of your lens are all user-controlled inputs that a lot of people on here tend to forget or have never learned. For these people, post processing IS necessary .... but for you newbie, it doesn't have to be if you don't want it to be.
And its not about what's on your screen. It's about the print. When it's all said and done, its about the print. Pop quiz: How many of you shot film for years, and 95+% of your photos looked sharp to you? How many of you, after looking at photos blown up to their full resolution now feel like only 25% of your photos are usable despite the fact your current camera is significantly newer and most likely better than your old film camera? Hmm, strange isn't it how quality went down. News flash, it didn't. You're just comparing apples to oranges. Print out the photos on a 4x6, like you did all those old rolls of film, and tell me how they look.
This is all for now. Time to go home (at work right now). If I have time, later tonight I'll try to make a "How to troubleshoot ..." topic to address some basic photo trouble-shooting techniques for the advice-givers on these forums that suffer from C.R.A.P. syndrome. Since I'm going to want to include photo examples, this will take some time.
Mods, I'm sorry. There is no tone here, and I'm not trying to single anyone out. But there is clearly a ton of horrible advice flying around that needs to be addressed before we kill this hobby off for a few dozen people who after spending $1K+ on a camera, are told that they must spend $1K+ more on lenses when in reality you can pick up the 18-55, 50mm 1.8, and 75-300 for less than $400 and have all focal lengths covered as well as having a good portrait and indoor light lens.
To those who feel impelled to defend their L choices ... I again, apologzie. I'm not saying L lenses are bad, but most of you have more money invested in this hobby than the pros that I know and if your advice continues, we're going to have to rename this to Rich-Peoples-0nly-Photography-On-The.Net I'm still willing to bet I know quite a few people who can take significantly better photos with significantly worse hardware. As mentioned earlier, this doesn't apply to sports/action photography .... but just about everything else it does apply to.
If you have the pockets, and don't want to bother with lesser hardware, that's your choice and I applaud your financial success. But please keep in mind that not everyone has the endless pockets you do. My wife and I have no kids (currently, that changes in March), have no debt, and make $200K a year yet for some reason I don't have a closet full of L glass!? Maybe its cause those damn mutual funds, savings accounts, and trips to the supermarket steal it, but if you guys have a secret to aquiring these significant lenses while not actually making a dime off of them ... I'd love to hear it.
Bill in Brooklyn
