Which mode should I use on my camera?

Question

On the top of most cameras is a selector knob which will allow you to select different modes. These range depending on the camera, my camera (Nikon D5100) has several choices.

I have been told conflicting things about which mode to use. From my understanding most DSLRs have M (Manual) S (Shutter Priority) A (Aperture Priority) P (Program Mode) and possibly Auto mode. Some models (specifically entry level) have other modes some of which could be Night, Macro, Landscape, Portrait, etc.

I have been told by one person to use all available modes the camera has to offer as I learn more about photography. While another person said only use M, S, A, P modes and avoid all the rest while you learn.

Which of the statements is generally more correct?

A few notes: I have every intention and am currently attempting to learn as much as possible about the camera and how to capture great photos but I am a beginner. I shoot in RAW most of the time. And I want to capture the best possible shot with the camera (not have to process it in post extensively to get the best shot).

Asked by Lynda

Answer

Which of the statements is generally more correct?

I believe the first one is correct which is

Use all available modes the camera has to offer as I learn more about photography.

I'll explain how:

Most entry DSLR cameras have the following modes:

• Full Auto Mode: use this mode if you just want to get the shot, perhaps you saw something that will go a way and you want to shoot it fast but if you started to set your settings you will miss the shot, the fastest way to take the shot is to dial in Full Auto and snap the shutter.

• Scene Modes: the actual names differ from camera from manufacturer to another, but functionality is similar. You may find Portrait, Night, Landscape or Scene, Macro, Sports or Pets & Children. These scenes are still auto but each one is trying to set the settings according to the chosen mode. For example, if you choose Sports (sometimes called Pets & Children) the camera will raise the shutter speed to freeze the moment/action. Night will raise the ISO, open the aperture more, lower the shutter speed, raise the flash. So these modes are still auto but when you choose one of them you help the camera to make a faster decision about its shooting settings. Use these modes with the Full Auto mode to learn about your camera decisions by looking at the chosen settings in your post processing program. You will build a feeling about the shot if it looks nice or not and what are the settings that the camera used to develop this shot.

• Programmed Mode: This mode is more advanced than Auto Modes, it gives you more control on the camera settings. Basically you can control almost all the settings except for Aperture and Shutter Speed. You want to use this mode if you want to enhance your learning skills regarding changing everything except aperture and shutter speed. Learn when you should raise or lower ISO, when to raise your flash, and also how to compensate the exposure.

• Aperture Priority Mode: This mode allows you to control aperture and sets the shutter speed automatically. Learn how to control Aperture and the different effects by different apertures. narrow aperture allows great depth of field (for landscape) while wide aperture allows shallow depth of field (for portraiture)

• Shutter Speed Priority Mode: This mode allows you to control shutter speed and sets the aperture automatically. Learn the effects by slow shutter speed and fast shutter speed.

• Full Manual Mode: Full manual mode allows you to control all settings in camera. In my opinion, this mode is there in DSLR to force you to THINK before you snap the shutter. My father has been a serious amateur 35mm film photographer for 30 years. When I got my first P&S camera almost 7 years ago, he was very annoyed by how fast I used to snap the shutter button and telling me this is not the right way to do it.

• Bulb Mode: Keeps the shutter open as long as you are pressing the shutter button. Use this to learn about very long exposure photography and its effects.

Use all the modes to learn and practice. After time you will tend to use the mode that you feel it suites your needs, but you can't tell which one is it until you've tried all of them. Also get yourself into the habit of looking on your photos in your post-processing program and pay attention to the settings values, you surely will learn from that.

Answered by Akram Mellice

Check more discussion of this question.

Why does a 15-second exposure on my camera actually last 16 seconds?

Question

I was doing a test and wanted the shutter to stay open for 15 seconds -- no problem, I have a 15-second exposure setting in my camera. It seemed to stay open for about an extra second, though, so I started timing it. The 15-second setting takes about 16.1 seconds (+/- about 0.2 seconds or whatever my measurement accuracy is) between the first and second set of sounds the mirror makes. I also timed the 4-second setting, and it takes exactly 4.0 seconds (+/- my measurement accuracy); I measured the 30-second setting at 31.9 seconds.

For the sake of this question, I'm assuming that the 15-second exposure is taking exactly 16 seconds and the 30-second exposure is taking exactly 32 seconds, while the 4-second exposure is taking exactly 4 seconds.

I understand why 16 seconds would be more desirable (and probably easier to implement in software) than 15 (more-precisely one stop longer than 8 seconds), and I also realize that for a 15-second exposure, 1 extra second is a fraction of a third of a stop, and I probably wouldn't be able to see the difference between two otherwise-identical pictures taken at 15 and 16 seconds. But why is the setting called "15" when it's actually 16 (and it's relatively easy to measure that delta)?

Is this common among cameras, or unique to my camera's brand (Canon) or model (30D)?

Is there a spec somewhere that calls this out?

Should I be trying to measure more shutter speeds (in the fractions-of-a-second range) to see if my camera is mis-behaving?

If this is intentional, do the shorter shutter speeds that aren't exact halves/doubles also have different shutter speeds than they claim (e.g. 1/60 - 1/125)?

Asked by drewbenn

Answer

In "classic" cameras systems exposures varied by a factor of two between adjustment steps and by a factor of 2 with standard aperture number changes. The aperture f numbers usually provided vary by a factor of square root of 2 as the aperture is proportional to the square of the diameter and stop numbers relate to the diameter.
ie aperture is an area measure which is proportional to diameter squared. Yes, that hopefully makes sense if you read it slowly a few times :-).

The important thing is that a "classic" range of exposure times would be, starting at 1 second:

• 1 2 4 8 16 32 64 128 ...

The question is more why it would be labelled 15.

They may well be wanting to match the times to fractions of a minute so eg

• 1 2 4 8 15 30 60 120 ...

BUT leaving theactual values in a true power of 2 progression from 1 second.

However, going to faster steps starting at 1 second we also "run into problems".

1 1/2 1/4 1/8 1/16 1/32 1/64 1/128 is OK in fractional form BUT when written as decimal we get

1 0.5 0.25 0.125 0.0625 0.03125 0.015... ... you get the idea. Gets messy.

SO along the way people cheated slightly. The series may end up slightly like

1 1/2 1/4 1/8 1/16 1/30 1/60 1/125 1/250 1/500 1/1000 1/2000 1/4000 1/8000 ...

The decimal values get untidy around 1/16th to 1/125th but get tidy again below 1.250th and people largely don't use these.

The slight errors introduced are inside the margin of error in all but the most tightly controlled lighting situations and well inside what any eye-brain can guarantee they have seen (even if the eye can actually resolve it).

The first few differences are:

1/32 : 1/30 = 6.7% longer 1/64 : 1/60 = +6.6% longer 1/128 : 1/125 = +2.4% 1/256 : 1/250 = +2.4% at all settings above here

Your 15 seconds shown, 16 seconds actual is 6.7% longer than shown.

---

BUT many modern cameras blow all this away with shutter speeds in 0.3 EV or other steps that seem good to them. Worse, auto ISO or shutter speed or aperture systems may choose semi random settings so you MAY see eg 1/325th of a second. Very hard on classical system sensibilities ;-).

Answered by Russell McMahon

Check more discussion of this question.

When is it really necessary to use AF assist light?

Question

I find the AF assist light to be distracting at times when I'm trying to take a candid shot without disturbing the human subjects or taking pictures of pets (they hate getting the AF light in their eyes and turn away).

I find that if I turn off the AF assist light, the picture usually still turns out ok.

What is the AF assist light for and when is it really necessary?

Asked by nmc

Answer

AF assist light does not affect picture qualiyy per se.
What it does is assist the camera to focus by increasing light level.
Once focus lock has been achieved the assist light has done its job - its light does NOT appear in the image.

Experience will tell you when the light will improve focusing.
Often the camera may attempt to use the light when you can focus adequately without it by using a little extra effort. As light levels drop contrast levels fall and focusing becomes more difficult. By focusing on an area of visually distinctive contrast change you can focus in such situations and then recompose. I almost always waste all the nice focusing sensors that modern SLRs provide and use centre 'spot" focus plus recomposition.

A point will be reached as light falls where focusing slows dramatically or becomes very unreliable. At that stage you are well past where the AF assist light would have been of some use.

When shooting in good light levels a camera may 'decide' to use AF assist - often due to a darket area somewhere in the scene. So, even in the brightest day you can not be certain that the AF assiste will not be auto-triggered. In "street photography' or when photographing crowds, fairs, shows etc it is often not useful for people to be disturbed and alerted by the visually bright AF light. I've spent quite a lot of time wandering around china with a camera in recent years. I find that eg Chinese policemen are not keen to be photographed at the best of times. Alerting them to your artistic attentions with a bright red lights seems unwise [tm].

I do my best to try to remember to turn AF assist off when I am in walk around mode :-).

Answered by Russell McMahon

Check more discussion of this question.

What types of digital cameras are out there?

Question

Everything I come across while researching digital cameras for the most part falls into two categories: Point-and-Shoot and SLRs.

Are there any other types of cameras, be it professional or consumer, and if so, are there any advantages or disadvantages over point-and-shoot or SLR?

Note: I am not referring to "special" cameras that are specifically developed for a certain use; I am looking for a general overview. I'm also only interested in digital, not in film cameras.

Asked by Lynda

Answer

Other camera types that I can think of, in terms of digital, would be:

• Cell Phone - Destined, I think, to ultimately replace, or at least supplant, the point and shoot. They currently represent what is the most likely camera for a person to be carrying and that is what gives them advantage: the camera you have with you is infinitely better than the one that you do not. :) At any rate, they're getting better.

• Bridge - The basic body structure of an SLR with a built-in lens and P&S features. The name, as implied, is about bridging the point and shoot to the SLR. In my opinion, and it is strictly opinion, you end up with the disadvantages of both (bulk of an SLR, image quality of a P&S) without their advantages (lens interchange of an SLR, portability of a P&S).

• Medium Format - Big, powerful, and a price to match. The cheapest of these start at $10,000 and it skyrockets from there. The advantage? Image quality. The medium format camera represents the best of image quality, but they're bulky, have slow frame rates, and more restricted ISO ranges. So, there are trade-offs there, even for the price.

• Mirrorless - It can be micro four-thirds or the more radical Nikon V1 and Pentax Q, but these are interchangeable lens cameras without a mirror. They're often equipped with electronic viewfinders. Their advantage over P&S is usually in lens options and image quality, their advantage over the SLR is in size.

• Rangefinder - Not an SLR as it doesn't have the moving mirror. Leica is the king of this market. Big advantage is smaller body over an SLR, but they don't lend themselves well to zoom lenses because of the rangefinder.

However, even in the two you really know about, the variation is enormous. Not all P&S cameras are made equal and for the SLR world you have:

• Entry Level - Almost a point and shoot, but with interchangeable lenses. The Canon 600D/T3i or the Nikon 3100 are great examples of this.

• Prosumer - Pro level features, consumer styling. The Canon 60D or the Nikon 5100 are examples.

• High-end Prosumer - More pro features, such as weather sealing, faster frame rates, etc. The Canon 7D or Pentax K-5 are good examples.

• Professional - Usually full-frame sensors the size of 35mm film. These are top of the line cameras such as the Canon 1DX or the Nikon D700.

Note that some of these cameras blend or bleed between tiers, but the feature sets on the cameras do tend to lend themselves to one of those 4 tiers.

Anyways, that's my synopsis. I'm sure others could expound upon this much more.

Answered by John Cavan

Check more discussion of this question.

Why do cell phones have the camera in a corner and not in the middle?

Question

It seems counter intuitive because of how you hold the cell phone.

Asked by publicRavi

Answer

Most times it's because putting the lens in the center would require unacceptable design compromises.

The average camera-equipped smartphone has a large, flat battery just behind the back cover. Putting the camera in the middle would require splitting the battery or manufacturing one with a hole in the middle, which would get very expensive.

Answered by Blrfl

Check more discussion of this question.

Do megapixels matter with modern sensor technology?

Question

Are more megapixels good?

Are more megapixels bad?

Do more megapixels increase detail? Do they make my images sharper? On the other side, is there a point that is too much? Do megapixels cause increased noise and other problems? How does print and viewing size come into it?

Widespread Internet-forum wisdom used to be that 6 megapixels was the sweet spot — below that just wasn't enough, but above that, there wasn't much benefit. File sizes got larger, but detail was lost to noise and other problems. The arguments are that cramming too many pixels into a small sensor makes each pixel too small to provide any real benefit, and that higher-megapixel sensors outresolve cheap lenses anyway. (Substitute something like 12 instead of 6 if we're discussing APS-C DSLRs.)

This year, pretty much every camera introduced is in the range of 12-18 megapixels. Does this offer any real improvement over that old "sweet spot"? Has technology improved to the point where the "wisdom" needs to be updated, or are we all suffering for marketing? Or have we gone past the sweet spot in some ways, but it's okay because of previously-un-argued points. (For example: more noise, sure, but more detail as well.)

Within the 12-18 megapixel common-today range, for the same sensor size, is there any actual benefit to the higher end? (We've got a question on that specifically, but it attracted very literal replies — I'm looking for why and how.) How do megapixels directly affect image quality with today's technology? What are the benefits and when do they apply? What are the drawbacks, and when do they apply? How should I adjust my technique (and expectations) based on my camera's megapixel count?

Asked by mattdm

Answer

From a purely theoretical point of view: more megapixels good.

People often talk about how high megapixel sensors were now outresolving most lenses, thus there was no point going higher unless using the very best glass. This is not always true. System resolution is the product of lens resolution and sensor resolution. Thus if you improve one, your system resolution will improve regardless of the other. You do eventually get into diminishing returns, but from a theoretical viewpoint a sensor can't outresolve a lens until diffraction effects take over).

Theoretically for a fixed final output size noise is independent of sensor resolution. Yes smaller pixels capture less light, therefore the per pixel noise level is higher. But if you resize a high megapixel image to match a lower one, you average pixel values thus noise is evened out. People regularly complain about noisy high megapixel compacts when viewing images at 100%. But that's a totally unfair comparison.

---

From a practical point of view: more megapixels not bad

From a practical view the noise situation is more complicated, but evidence I've seen suggests that high MP sensors are not much noisier when compared at the same image size (see above). I'll look up some links.

The situation on resolution is complicated by the fact [most] sensors don't see in colour and thus have a bayer grid which requires an anti aliasing filter. Aliasing is worst when the sampling frequency matches your signal (i.e. image detail) frequency. Increasing the megapixel count faster than increases in signal frequency should improve aliasing, to the point where the traditional aliasing filter can be removed.

There are other practical issues which relate to your ability to extract extra detail from your sensor:

• The 1/focal length rule no longer applies as you increase megapixels, you need ever increasing stabilisation, and also increasing shutter speeds as subject motion becomes more apparent.

• Diffraction becomes more of a problem as you increase megapixels as the pixels become smaller than the Airy disk.

• Data processing and storage requirements are higher.

It's worth emphasising that these are not disadvantages of higher megapixel counts, since you can always downsize your images, and you're not lost anything when compared to a lower megapixel count camera. The exception being in camera data processing, since the camera has to read the whole sensor when shooting stills and somehow process this information.

---

So how high can you go? I've seen calculations of the diffraction limiting aperture for red light with a 350 megapixel full frame sensor being f/2.8 (green and blue light requiring even larger apertures) so that gives you an idea. Personally I think your returns would get small past a 50 megapixel 35mm sensor, up to a maximum of maybe 75-100. Once you get noticeable diffraction at f/5.6 people are going to become disinterested, and once you have to open up to f/2.8 with a lens that's razor sharp at f/2.8, the megapixel race is over.

Larger formats allow more megapixels before diffraction sets in (at a given f/stop) however depth of field is shallower at the same f/stop, requiring you to stop down more for depth of field, so there appears to be no intrinsic advantage when it comes to diffraction.

The existence of 60 megapixel medium format camera points to the fact it would be possible, diffraction wise, given good enough glass. Though as users of such cameras point out how difficult it is to utilise 60MP this points to it being a good practical limit, if not a theoretical one.

Answered by Matt Grum

Check more discussion of this question.

Best websites to find deals on purchasing Digital Camera / Equipment?

Question

What are the best websites ( other than Amazon ) to find deals on purchasing digital cameras and equipment?. Canon EOS 60 D is on my wishlist and I am looking for Discount / Deals.

Most of my shopping cart is filled from Amazon.com, Is there any specific website where we can purchase only cameras and accessories?

Asked by Medex

Answer

I've purchased equipment from following site with great satisfaction:

bhphoto.com
adorama.com
keh.com

Answered by Alen

Check more discussion of this question.

What is the small +- wheel next to my view port for?

Question

I had a scare last night when everything in my view port looked blurry on my brand new Canon 60D, even the digital display a red focus boxes.

The images photos came out clear, the live view was clear, the auto focus was working but everything in the view finder was fuzzy.

I realized spinning/adjusting the small wheel next to the view port fixed this issue.

So my question is, why is this needed at all, what is it for? Is there a way to turn it off? I don't want to accidentally spin it again and make everything fuzzy.

Asked by John Isaacks

Answer

That control adjusts the diopter, an optical adjustment to the viewfinder that allows folks with varying vision abilities to see things clearly. Think of it a bit like reading glasses - it allows for minor vision correction. The idea is that folks who have decent vision but might need minor correction can make an adjustment on the diopter so that as they look through the viewfinder, objects are clear.

As you note, for someone with perfect vision, throwing and adjustment in there can actually make things look worse and cause problems with manual focus.

As it is a manual/mechanical adjustment, I'm not aware of a way to disable the ability to adjust the diopter, although a bit of gaffer's tape over the dial might help avoid inadvertent adjustments.

Answered by ahockley

Check more discussion of this question.

Why is the sensor size small in D3100 as compared to D3000?

Question

I thought D3100 must be more advanced than D3000 (because of the numbers, and the price).

D3000's sensor size is: 23.6mm x 15.8mm and D3100's sensor size is: 23.1mm x 15.4mm

Well, D3100 has an extra feature of live view, fine, but can there be any special reason that they decided to reduce the sensor size in a more advanced camera?

Is there anything in D3100 which "makes up" for the reduced sensor size or am I simply missing some point?

Asked by Anisha Kaul

Answer

Just to put this into perspective, this is a 4.8% difference in sensor area. Or, linearly, it's 2.3% difference in crop factor.

This is not very much, and generally other measurement tolerances will be less precise. For example, if you measure the actual focal length of, say, a bunch of different models of 50mm lenses, they probably have a greater variation in field of view.

In general, newer sensor technology moves forward, and in this case there's no exception: the D3100's sensor is significantly better, particularly for controlling noise at high ISOs. From dpreview:

The D3100 offers little to complain about in terms of image quality, and its new 14Mp sensor delivers very good results. High ISO performance is substantially improved over the D3000 [...].

Basically, the small difference in sensor size is insignificant compared to the improvements in terms of image quality, and the small difference in framing is likewise a non-issue.

Answered by mattdm

Check more discussion of this question.

Are scene modes, white balance, color tones, and similar just post-processing effects?

Question

What happens when the following settings are changed:

• White balance
• Color tones
• Scene modes

Are these parameters affect the way in which the photo is taken or they are just applied by processing by camera after taking the image?

Or do these parameters change the way the image sensor records the image?

What about changing the contrast, or sharpness?

Answer

The question What's "real" and what's "virtual" on a (digital) camera? has several answers which list the things which are "real" — that is, the things which affect the capture of the RAW image. To crib from the top answers, these things are:

• ISO
• Aperture
• Shutter Speed
• Focus

with some more technical things like image stabilization and mirror lockup as well.

The answers there don't really cover what's "not real", except by elimination, so let me go over your specifics.

White balance and color tones do not affect these "real" things directly — they're applied to the RAW image in in-camera (or out of camera) post processing. However, it's not quite straightforward, since the selected options can affect the metering — a very blue-shifted white balance might cause a different interpretation of what the exposure should be than a very yellow-shifted one. That, in turn, may make the camera's automatic modes choose slightly different settings. But that's a bit esoteric: the straight answer is white balance and color tones are "after effects".

But "scene modes" are somewhat different, since they apply a whole grab-bag of different settings. Some of these, like a fast shutter speed for a sports mode, will almost certainly affect the real image. Others, like portrait modes, may simply chose post-processing options more suited for delicate-appearing skin.

Your last two, contrast and sharpness, are also an "it depends". These things are strongly influenced by the lens you use, your aperture selected, and correct focus. So in that sense, they are real and unalterable. But, local and global contrast can also be boosted in post-production, and usually is — in fact, usually very much so in the default JPEG output from most cameras. Without that, the out-of-camera images would look much more dull and flat than we are accustomed to. A good camera — or RAW processing software — will give you a lot of individual control over these parameters in the post-processing sense.

Check more discussion of this question.

Is it a myth or a fact that mostly it is the lenses which make your photographs not the camera bodies?

Question

I read somewhere on this site itself that you should spend more on your lenses and less on your camera bodies.

Is it a myth or a fact that mostly it is the lenses which make your photographs not the camera bodies? If it is true, then on what basis?

Answer

It's a bit of both.

Everything that the camera has to work with comes to it through the lens. If the lens is horribly soft (that is, it gives low-contrast and not very sharp images) when you do everything right, then it doesn't make a lot of difference what camera it's attached to, you're not going to be able to get razor-sharp images with a lot of "pop". The same goes for any of the optical characteristics of a lens -- the camera can't give you a wider maximum aperture, lower distortion, etc.†

So there is a minimum level of optical quality below which you really don't want to fall when selecting lenses, and there really is no substitute for having the right class of lens for the job (whether that means having a wide maximum aperture or the right focal length).

And there are handling issues to consider as well -- many of the "kit" lenses and crop-sensor superzooms are optically very good (some are actually excellent), but they're almost impossible to focus manually because they have only a very narrow ring of knurled plastic way out on the far end of a wobbly set of focus tubes to work with. If you don't focus manually, you'd never notice, but a Zen master on Valium could easily find himself smashing what is otherwise an acceptable lens to smithereens (and kicking kittens) if manual focus was important to him. And some lenses that get the optics very right but saved money on the construction exhibit zoom or focus creep -- the glass in the lens is heavier than the mechanical bits can handle, so when you point the lens up or down, gravity does its thing and changes your settings.

All of that said, though, a lens can't fix all of the problems with a camera either. If you need to shoot, say, people in very low ambient light, it's a lot easier (though only slightly less expensive) to find a camera that will let you work at ISO 25,600 than it is to find a lens with an f/0.35 maximum aperture (and if you did find the lens, you'd have to decide which part of which eyelash on which person you wanted in focus, since everything else will be thoroughly blurred). And on the camera I use hand-held and in the field most of the time,‡ a 6MP Nikon D70, there isn't enough resolution on the sensor for me to see the difference between an excellent lens and one that's merely very good -- I could spend a fortune on the very best lenses, but until I change cameras I can't see the difference in my photographs. So yes, the camera body makes a much bigger difference in the digital era than it did in the film era. But it still can't make up for a horrible lens.

And let's be realistic, too -- the lens you can afford and actually use to take pictures will always be better than the brilliant but expensive pinnacle of the lensmaker's art that never gets closer to you than your Amazon wish list. When it comes right down to it, it's much better to have a $300 dollar Samyang on your camera, with all of its flaws and foibles, than an $1800 Nikkor locked away safely in your local photo boutique. The picture you can't take never comes out well.

As Nir said, the photographer, not the tools, is the biggest limiting factor.

---

^{† Both cameras and some outboard processing software can remove things like geometric distortion (barrel and pincushion), vignetting and lateral chromatic abberation after the fact by calculating what the image would have looked like without the problems, but that always involves losing some of the original data.}

^{‡ I have Parkinson's disease, and I can't afford to buy a new top-of-the-range camera every time I drop one or involuntarily swing it into a wall. Meds can keep the tremors under control (and one learns to time things), but they don't do much for the clumsiness. At under $200 per, I don't worry about the D70s so much, and that's liberating. (I can't wait for the "ew, that's so-o-o old" used D7000s to hit the market at that price, though.) There's the whole CCD sync speed thing, too -- everything is X-sync, and all I have to consider is the flash duration being longer than my selected shutter speed. And since most of what I shoot is for small prints and the web, 6MP isn't much of a limitation. Now, if I could just get it to work in available darkness...}

Check more discussion of this question.

How to focus manually when you don't have a live view in the DSLR?

Question

Nikon D3000 doesn't have a live view which means that the scene can't be seen on the LCD screen.

So, how do you use the manual focus in such cases? Hit and trial, or is there a way out?

Answer

You still use the autofocus points most of the time. Even though the camera isn't doing the focusing, it can still tell you when things are in focus, and the green focus indicator light in the viewfinder will come on when the image hitting the selected control point is in focus.

If you work mostly in manual focus mode, it may be worthwhile getting a new focusing screen with the kind of prism-collar and split-image focus aids we used to use in the pre-AF days. That can be an expensive option, though, especially when compared to the D3000. If it's important, go for it, but it can make the viewfinder block out in the center when you're using slower lenses, and you probably have higher priorities for additional investment in your gear.

You can sort of focus by eye on the ground glass, but because of the focusing screen's design, it is hard to be accurate at all -- it's something best left for small-aperture, large depth-of-field shots where focus errors won't show very much.

Check more discussion of this question.

What types of Cameras are out there?

Question

Everything I come across while researching cameras for the most part falls into two categories. Point-and-Shoot and SLRs (not going into the film vs digital here I am referring to only digital)

Are there really any other types of cameras be it Professional or Consumer and if so are there any advantages or disadvantages over Point-And-Shoot and SLR?

(Please Note: I am not referring to "special" cameras that are specifically developed for a certain use I am looking for a general overview.)

Answer

Other camera types that I can think of, in terms of digital, would be:

• Cell Phone - Destined, I think, to ultimately replace, or at least supplant, the point and shoot. They currently represent what is the most likely camera for a person to be carrying and that is what gives them advantage: the camera you have with you is infinitely better than the one that you do not. :) At any rate, they're getting better.

• Bridge - The basic body structure of an SLR with a built-in lens and P&S features. The name, as implied, is about bridging the point and shoot to the SLR. In my opinion, and it is strictly opinion, you end up with the disadvantages of both (bulk of an SLR, image quality of a P&S) without their advantages (lens interchange of an SLR, portability of a P&S).

• Medium Format - Big, powerful, and a price to match. The cheapest of these start at $10,000 and it skyrockets from there. The advantage? Image quality. The medium format camera represents the best of image quality, but they're bulky, have slow frame rates, and more restricted ISO ranges. So, there are trade-offs there, even for the price.

• Mirrorless - It can be micro four-thirds or the more radical Nikon V1 and Pentax Q, but these are interchangeable lens cameras without a mirror. They're often equipped with electronic viewfinders. Their advantage over P&S is usually in lens options and image quality, their advantage over the SLR is in size.

• Rangefinder - Not an SLR as it doesn't have the moving mirror. Leica is the king of this market. Big advantage is smaller body over an SLR, but they don't lend themselves well to zoom lenses because of the rangefinder.

However, even in the two you really know about, the variation is enormous. Not all P&S cameras are made equal and for the SLR world you have:

• Entry Level - Almost a point and shoot, but with interchangeable lenses. The Canon 600D/T3i or the Nikon 3100 are great examples of this.

• Prosumer - Pro level features, consumer styling. The Canon 60D or the Nikon 5100 are examples.

• High-end Prosumer - More pro features, such as weather sealing, faster frame rates, etc. The Canon 7D or Pentax K-5 are good examples.

• Professional - Usually full-frame sensors the size of 35mm film. These are top of the line cameras such as the Canon 1DX or the Nikon D700.

Note that some of these cameras blend or bleed between tiers, but the feature sets on the cameras do tend to lend themselves to one of those 4 tiers.

Anyways, that's my synopsis. I'm sure others could expound upon this much more.

Check more discussion of this question.

How do I get the 'equivalent' focal length for a DSLR lens for my camera?

Question

On my Nikon D3000, how do I figure the focal length equivalence? In other words, if I want a lens that is just like a 50mm lens on a 35mm film SLR, I need to multiply by a factor. What is the factor, and how is it derived?

Also, when I buy a new lens for it, and the box says 70mm-300mm, I assume that's the true focal length of the camera and not the equivalent, so I have to apply the factor. Is that correct?

Answer

What is the factor, and how is it derived?

The factor (also commonly called a 'crop factor') is a measurement of how much larger a full-frame image sensor is than the sensor in your camera. People say the D3000's crop factor is 1.5 because a full-frame sensor is 1.5x larger than the D3000 sensor.

A full-frame sensor is 36mm x 24 mm. The sensor in the Nikon D3000 is 23.6mm x 15.8mm.

Comparing the sensor sizes along each dimension:

36mm / 23.6mm = 1.52 (approximately)

24mm / 15.8mm = 1.52 (approximately)

You can see how the full-frame sensor is around 1.5x the size of the D3000 sensor, hence the 1.5x crop factor.

Check more discussion of this question.

What is it called when an object appears to be the same size with the eye and through the camera viewfinder,?

Question

I have a Canon 18-135 lens. I am looking into the camera viewfinder with my right eye and not through the viewfinder with my left. I start from 18mm and keep zooming in till I see a particular object as the same size with both the eyes.

I read the focal length to be just above 50 mm (say, 55mm). What is special about this 55mm with reference to the object I was focussing on?

Answer

There's a specification on (d)SLR bodies called viewfinder magnification; this refers to how large an object appears in the viewfinder when a 50mm lens is mounted and focused at infinity.

On mid-range DSLRs, which typically have around 0.95x magnification, an object will appear to be life-sized at 52.6mm. With entry-level DSLRs, you might have around 0.8x magnification, so you'd have to zoom in to 62.5mm to get a 1:1 magnification. I'm betting your camera has somewhere around 0.9 to 0.95x magnification.

This has very little to do with the object, except that the front of the camera is slightly closer to the object. With far-away subjects (landscapes, etc), the distance between your eyes and the front of your camera won't matter much, but close subjects will appear larger to the camera than to your eye even with a 1:1 magnification.

Check more discussion of this question.

What are good resources for a beginning photographer?

Question

What are good resources (tutorials/books/videos/etc) for a beginning photographer?

Keep in mind that this is for a beginning photographer, who has recently moved from a point-and-shoot to an entry-level DSLR, and is interested in digging deeper into photography in general.

Examples of good topics for the resources to cover:

• what's aperture?, and other camera basics
• color temperature and lighting
• composition and visualization
• etc.

Answer

Try http://kelbytv.com/ for some great video tutorials.

also Photography Basics to understand the fundamentals.

I will link to similar questions on this site that have some resources as well

Should be enough in these resources:

• http://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tips
• http://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/1557/good-books-to-learn-photographic-composition-from
• http://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/learning

Check more discussion of this question.

What advantages does manual mode have over aperture priority mode?

Question

I'm wondering what are the most compelling reasons to switch to manual mode on my DSLR. I mostly just use aperture priority mode so I have good control over the depth of field combined with an awareness of the shutter speed that goes with it. My photography is mostly done wandering about with camera in hand, or occasionally on a tripod. I don't do studio photography and I just use the natural light.

I did learn how to take photos manually (with an Olympus OM-1) so I know how to do it, but I enjoy the extra convenience of aperture mode, particularly being able to take the photo quickly and capturing the moment rather than fiddling with dials and missing the shot.

So what would be some key advantages of using manual mode for my sort of photography that are worth the (small amount of) extra hassle involved?

And do you have any tips to minimise the downside (other than practicing to be quick)?

Answer

I typically use aperture priority as well, but I also work a fair bit in manual mode. The typical case for me is if I am in an environment where the lighting situation is quite static, but the subject may have a lot of contrast. Here I switch to manual mode and shoot a few test frames to pinpoint the exposure (typically I try to spot meter on a white surface, and then overexpose that reading by 1.5-2 steps as a first guess).

The main advantage is that you are in full control, and the camera will not be "fooled" by unexpected contrasts in the frame. The downside is that it is a bit slower to change exposure in case the lighting situation changes.

Check more discussion of this question.

How can a lens like a 18-55mm have more than one focal length?

Question

How can a lens have a range of focal lengths? Shouldn't it be a single number?

Isn't focal length supposed to be fixed for a lens of a particular shape and geometry?

What am I missing?

How many lenses are actually there in a "lens"?

Answer

A range of focal lengths indicates a zoom lens. There are two major classes of lenses. Primes, or primary lenses, have a single focal length. They tend to be higher quality, as there can be fewer lens elements, and fewer moving element groups. One exception to this rule is super telephoto prime lenses, particularly faster lenses (f/2.8), which are some of the most advanced optics on earth, and contain numerous element groups with special types of lens elements (i.e. ultra low dispersion glass, fluorite lenses, aspherical elements, etc.)

The other class are zoom lenses, and they have a range of focal lengths. They generally have more element groups overall, and usually have several moving groups. The length of a zoom lens can be increased or shortened, thus changing the focal length. The quality of a zoom lens depends on its construction. Some have great quality at one end of the range, and lesser quality at the other end. Some have great quality at the ends of the focal range, but lesser quality in the center of the range. Super telephoto zooms also often have special types of lens elements.

To answer the question about "how many lenses are in a lens", the question depends. Some lenses have few lens elements (individual glass or other material lenses within a camera lens body), and others have many. The number of lens elements in a given lens is usually an indication of a few things. Lower quality lenses tend to have fewer elements, and the glass used in those elements tends to be of a lower quality (less dense, greater chance of splitting light and causing things like chromatic aberration.) Lower-end lenses may have 3-5 lens elements total. Higher quality lenses tend to have more elements, and often larger elements. Many high-end lenses tend to have more lens elements, around 5-10. Higher end telephoto lenses may have 14-20 lens elements or more. More glass is generally required to produce wider apertures, and having a very wide front lens element often requires additional lens elements to focus that light down to a size that can pass through the lens mount into your camera. As focal length increases, maintaining the quality of the generated image often requires additional elements that serve different purposes. High end telephoto lenses often contain aspherical elements, ultra-low dispersion elements, fluorite elements, movable element groups, etc. These additional lens elements increase the control the lens has over light, but also increase the overall weight of the lens, and its manufacturing complexity.

Check more discussion of this question.

What should a beginner look at in comparing two point & shoot cameras?

Question

My interest in photography grew over the last few days, and I finally decided get into this thing. My goal is to become a Nature/Wildlife & Fashion photographer some day.

Since I am total beginner at present, I don't plan on buying a new camera or DSLR. What I have at hand are these - - a Canon PowerShot A590 IS (8MP) and a FUJIFILM FinePix AV100 (12MP) Series camera (I know both are really basic and pretty old models).

I have read that shouldn't be worried about the "megapixels" of camera, so what should I look for?

For instance, the specs for the two cameras I have are here and here. The examples are for the purpose of you suggesting me what I should look for in a camera.

Please advise, which one would be better and why? (Again, I am just a beginner, and I'll purchase a DSLR as soon as I get some understanding of how it all works, and some confidence. Thanks.)

Answer

This is a good exercise, and there are some interesting differences between these models which are illustrative of things worth comparing.

• Technology generations: The Fujifilm camera is from 2010 and the Canon model from two years earlier. Electronics continue their march of getting cheaper and faster, and in general newer models have an advantage — although this is most true in the midrange. At the high end, more expensive initial choices give cameras longer functional lives (and non-electronic benefits like better controls and better build aren't influenced by tech improvements); at the low-end, new models might "spend" the improved tech on lowering costs rather than increasing quality.
• Image stabilization: The Canon camera in your example has a "real" optical stabilization system, while the Fujifilm camera says it has "Digital Image Stabilization" which is doublespeak-like industry code for "no image stabilization".
• Sensor size: The Canon camera has a 1/2.5-inch type sensor, while the Fujifilm has a slightly bigger 1/2.3-inch sensor — this is about 15% more surface area, which in this case is not very significant. But in some cases, the sensor size can really make a difference.
• Optics: Both models feature a relatively useful moderate zoom. There's no way to compare image quality from the specs, and that's something that's probably also worth looking into if you can. The Fujifilm has a more conservative 3× zoom range (which is usually better for image quality), and provides a more-useful slightly wider angle (but not by much). Since you have the cameras, some actual test shots would be useful.
• Aperture: Related; the Canon camera opens up to f/2.6 at the wide end and f/5.5 at the long end of the zoom range. The Fujifilm is a third of a stop slower at the wide end, and similar at the telephoto end. (It doesn't zoom out as far so direct comparison isn't easy.) This is a more significant difference than the 15% sensor area, but it's also in this case pretty small. In some cameras, the difference is worth making a big deal about.
• CHDK: There's nifty firmware hacks available for Canon P&S cameras, including this model; there's really nothing like it for other brands. That might be a way to make an older camera do some really cool new tricks.
• Viewfinder: The Canon has one, the Fujifilm does not. This isn't a through-the-lens finder (it's basically a little tunnel of plastic optics) and so is less useful than the one on a DSLR, but it may still fit your photography better.
• Control modes: Honestly, this is less useful on a small-sensor camera, but if you're learning about photography it's nice to be able to take more control. Neither camera offers "full manual", but the Canon offers shutter priority and aperture priority program modes, while the Fujifilm is auto-exposure only. (In fact, I'm not sure it even has EV compensation or exposure lock, which would be a big concern.)
• Responsiveness: You can't really tell this from specs, but maybe can get it from reviews. Testing it yourself is of course great. There's several important things to look for: time it takes to go from off to ready, time it takes from shot to ready again, and lag between when you fully-press the shutter to actually taking the photo. Secondarily, a fast AF speed and at least moderate burst rate are nice.

Then there's control layout, build, and general feel. This varies model to model but the different brands do tend to fit some generalization. For example, in every Canon P&S camera I've used — including the high-end ones — zooming is very clearly a "stepped" operation. You press the zoom lever, and it goes from 35mm to 50mm to 85mm, or whatever sequence of pre-programmed points the camera offers. Fujifilm cameras still use a servomotor that works in the same way (with the exception of a few which have the great feature of using manual zoom lenses), but there are more steps and it feels smoother.

Whether this is a concern or bother to you is somewhat personal — as is the issue of control or feel in general, but for learning photography, you do want as many accessible controls as possible, and basically more buttons is better, because fiddling in menus is no good.

Check more discussion of this question.

What is one “stop”?

Question

I always hear this term, e.g.,

• I had to go down one stop
• Increasing X by Y raises Z by one stop
• I turned down the flash/the light two stops
• This lens/sensor/strobe/Photoshop tweak raises X by around one stop

That one too!: "Around one stop"... Is there a 0.85 or a 1.13 of a stop, to be exact?

Is this (always) the same thing as an f-stop? I am so confused!

Answer

A stop will halve or double the amount of light, depending on the direction and that could mean the amount of light reaching the sensor or how sensitive the sensor is made to the light that is reaching it.

So, for example, to reduce something a stop, I could go from ISO 800 to ISO 400, or I could go from a 1/500 to 1/1000 shutter speed, or I could change the aperture from f/2.8 to f/4. Going opposite direction on any of these would increase the light by a stop.

An f-stop is the term used to describe the aperture positions on a lens. It's the basis for the more general term of a "stop" when describing the amount of light for the exposure.

Check more discussion of this question.