Camera Settings (1 Viewer)

JohnZ said:

Sometimes I set my lens up at f6.3. God knows why !

Click to expand...

Nice one John - LOL :-O:-O:-O

Another vote for auto white balance and shooting in RAW.

With the 450 there is a F4.5, 5, 5.6, 6.3, 7.1 and 8.0.

I have a Tokina 80-400 zoom...not Canon quality, I know but not bad.....and especially for the price. I also liked the weight (37 oz) and length (11cm).

At the moment the Northwest is cloudy and rainy.....I found if I go AV mode, even with ISO up high the shutter speed is still low....when I am at aperture 5.6 or 6.3 etc...

If I go to manual mode, I can get shutter speed today around 1000, aperture at 5.6 and ISO at 1600...

So I can see there is no clear formula to use here as I know in sunnier days or less cloudy days I can shoot in AV mode 5.6 with better shutter speed etc....

Each day is different...each setting will have to be too.

Thanks for the information on the whitebalance. I will set it to auto and play with RAW...but I know that is another can of worms as well

lmans66 said:

With the 450 there is a F4.5, 5, 5.6, 6.3, 7.1 and 8.0.

Click to expand...

Inmans, this is in 1/3rd of a stop increments. the actual stops go f2.8, f4, f5.6, f8, f11 .... Example: f6.3 is 1/3rd of a stop above f5.6. This is the same on all Cameras.

Re the white balance, I would still advise using Auto even if you shoot in jpeg.

For those camera novices (not birding)....like myself.....here is a great site on aperture:

http://www.photoxels.com/tutorial_aperture.html

There is a cool visual that goes with the explanation of aperture.....etc....

Hi
Can anyone tell me how I can bookmark threads such as this, without contributing to the thread (I know that once I have contributed I have access to the thread anytime in my posts)

Cheers
Dave

Bananafishbones said:

Hi
Can anyone tell me how I can bookmark threads such as this, without contributing to the thread (I know that once I have contributed I have access to the thread anytime in my posts)

Cheers
Dave

Click to expand...

Top right of the first post in any thread is a drop down menu entitled 'Thread Tools'. Just click on 'subscribe to this thread' and you'll be notified of any new posts even if you haven't added one yourself.

Thanks Ian

I don't know if this will help but I suggest using AV and don't be afraid to up the ISO. I took these shots this week and they have all but he last one had zero PP'ing other than converting to JPEG and resizing to allow them to be posted on here. My camera is an 20D, lens 100-400 mm and I prefer f8 (although one of these was at f5.6). I have also included the PP'd version of the ISO 1600 version.

Cameras can easily get fooled in reading the light, especially if the subject is small and backdropped by light areas as birds high in trees or flying often are.

Setting a camera in manual and learning how to set exposure could be beneficial to many folks and would lead to a greater understanding of the automated systems.

Takes me a moment to take a look at the direction I'm shooting, point the camera to an average colored, large subject in the same direction with the same light falling on it (this is usually very easy, and pointing the camera at the back of a hand does it) and noting the exposure. I then just set that exposure manually. It takes seconds to do, much faster than writing it or reading it makes it seem. Then, the camera will not, cannot get fooled, and you can shoot away.

As for the "sweet spot of a lens", most likely the amount of background blur you want (usually the most possible for the least distraction when the viewer is looking at the shot) and image shake considerations will be more important than if you were at the sweetest aperture. To test this just put your camera on a tripod, focus on a certain item, and shoot at the various apertures. Look at the shots, now you'll know in the future if you wish to shoot that lens "wide open". Often too much ado is made regarding "this lens is sharpest at f8" type statements.

I'm not a bird photographer, so I'm not presenting myself as an authority on this (I took my first bird shot this week and it's only an "identification" shot, but the photographic advice is relevant). In this shot the displayed image is only about 1/5th of the frame, and even withing this cropped area the bird is only 1/4 of the frame, at most, so the camera's automated metering surely would have so grossly underexposed the bird that the detail in the slight iridescent coloring most likely would have been lost in noise. With a manual setting the bird did not need to be lightened.