Help a newbie get started with photography.
October 7, 2013 6:36 PM Subscribe
I'm purchasing my first DSLR and I'd like to take full advantage of it. I have a lot of experience with scientific imaging (I run a microscope lab) but I don't have much experience with aesthetic photography or how best to take advantage of a DSLR. I'd like your advice on books, websites, and other resources to help me get the best photos. All aspects of photography are helpful: operating the camera, composing photos, and post-processing.
Specifically, I'm getting a Nikon D3200 with the kit 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens, and I will mostly be taking photos of my family (we're expecting our first kid in January). Advice on software (I'm a PC guy) for processing photos is also welcome.
Specifically, I'm getting a Nikon D3200 with the kit 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens, and I will mostly be taking photos of my family (we're expecting our first kid in January). Advice on software (I'm a PC guy) for processing photos is also welcome.
The best thing you can do is start taking pictures. You could start with the full-on automatic, and start working on compositions initially, but you would be better off figuring out what happens when you shoot on manual. Make mistakes and learn from them.
My current favorite lens on my Canon is a fixed-focal point lens, the "nifty fifty." It's fast, lightweight, and forces me to set up shots without crutching on the zoom.
posted by computech_apolloniajames at 7:06 PM on October 7, 2013
My current favorite lens on my Canon is a fixed-focal point lens, the "nifty fifty." It's fast, lightweight, and forces me to set up shots without crutching on the zoom.
posted by computech_apolloniajames at 7:06 PM on October 7, 2013
My advice is to buy that 50mm f1.8, read a bit (for example), take some experimental pictures, read a bit more, take more pictures, repeat ad naseum. A single, fast lens will challenge you (yet free you of carrying equipment and of making decisions) and it's cheap/spectacular quality. With some exceptions (like portraiture), you can neglect zooming for cropping while gaining in low light and fast action capability. Shoot in manual or aperture-priority mode.
There's really no excuse to not learn by doing in the age of digital photography - I had to edit the yearbook to pay for my habit!
"Depth-of-field sounds interesting. Today I'll take nothing but pictures of flowers in bloom, close-up, and figure out how it really works."
posted by kcm at 7:18 PM on October 7, 2013
There's really no excuse to not learn by doing in the age of digital photography - I had to edit the yearbook to pay for my habit!
"Depth-of-field sounds interesting. Today I'll take nothing but pictures of flowers in bloom, close-up, and figure out how it really works."
posted by kcm at 7:18 PM on October 7, 2013
The nifty fifty equivalent for the Nikon is the 50mm f/1.8 and it should be something that you own.
Get reasonable quality UV filters (you don't need top notch but the really cheap ones will degrade your quality) and keep them on the lenses to protect them from damage, dust, and fingers.
The really cheap tripods are terrible and will break. Spend a little more to get something that will hold up.
Picasa is free and gives you most of the basics of processing RAW files. Lightroom is not that expensive but may be overkill and overwhelming for your needs.
Don't take too many photos. It sucks you out of being there, no one wants to see 200 almost identical photos, and it will create a backlog of photos that you won't get around to putting anywhere.
Get an external flash and a diffuser - it'll make a world of difference for getting action shots of a fast moving child inside. The pop up one on the camera will tend to lead to harsh and ugly shots whereas a diffused one can look pretty natural but way better than reality (taking care of harsh shadows, for example).
Do most of your shooting in Aperture or Shutter mode and get experience with how changing that setting affects the other settings the camera chooses and how it comes out looking. With Nikon, I've found that the auto-ISO settings are wretched and always set it manually. I also often dial down the exposure compensation when I'm shooting action shots.
I've always shot pretty instinctively so I can't recommend books on composition, but find photos that you like an examine how they're composed and try to take similar photos yourself. The basic rule is that taking shots a little different than the way people generally see things tends to be compelling. Keep things out of the center, go high or low with perspective, etc.
As far as learning the basics, your local library should have a few books that'll help.
posted by Candleman at 7:34 PM on October 7, 2013 [4 favorites]
Get reasonable quality UV filters (you don't need top notch but the really cheap ones will degrade your quality) and keep them on the lenses to protect them from damage, dust, and fingers.
The really cheap tripods are terrible and will break. Spend a little more to get something that will hold up.
Picasa is free and gives you most of the basics of processing RAW files. Lightroom is not that expensive but may be overkill and overwhelming for your needs.
Don't take too many photos. It sucks you out of being there, no one wants to see 200 almost identical photos, and it will create a backlog of photos that you won't get around to putting anywhere.
Get an external flash and a diffuser - it'll make a world of difference for getting action shots of a fast moving child inside. The pop up one on the camera will tend to lead to harsh and ugly shots whereas a diffused one can look pretty natural but way better than reality (taking care of harsh shadows, for example).
Do most of your shooting in Aperture or Shutter mode and get experience with how changing that setting affects the other settings the camera chooses and how it comes out looking. With Nikon, I've found that the auto-ISO settings are wretched and always set it manually. I also often dial down the exposure compensation when I'm shooting action shots.
I've always shot pretty instinctively so I can't recommend books on composition, but find photos that you like an examine how they're composed and try to take similar photos yourself. The basic rule is that taking shots a little different than the way people generally see things tends to be compelling. Keep things out of the center, go high or low with perspective, etc.
As far as learning the basics, your local library should have a few books that'll help.
posted by Candleman at 7:34 PM on October 7, 2013 [4 favorites]
The one book that really helped me understand shooting is Peterson's Understand Exsposure. Everything else is practice and experimentation; Candleman has it covered.
posted by thecjm at 7:45 PM on October 7, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by thecjm at 7:45 PM on October 7, 2013 [2 favorites]
I suggest you do a short course which covers the basics of DSLR photography. I did this after I'd had my DSLR for a year, and I learnt a lot more than I thought I would. Certainly more than I'd managed to teach myself during a year of experimenting on my own, despite the fact that I was a prolific shooter.
The course I did also had reviews where you would shoot photos each week as homework and have them critiqued in the next session. This was enormously helpful and really made a difference to my photography.
posted by RubyScarlet at 7:54 PM on October 7, 2013 [2 favorites]
The course I did also had reviews where you would shoot photos each week as homework and have them critiqued in the next session. This was enormously helpful and really made a difference to my photography.
posted by RubyScarlet at 7:54 PM on October 7, 2013 [2 favorites]
I know your laying out a few hundred bucks on this SLR; I bought its ancestor, the 3000, less than a year ago. Nonetheless, I want to recommend some accessories: Get a spare battery and plug-in charger, and a longer strap for carry; the one it comes with is fine for over the neck, but tiny if you want to carry over the head and shoulder, unless you're a small-built person. Get a decent flash card-- you don't need a pile of SD cards, but get one that's big (32GB at least) and fast. SD cards are rated for speed Class 1 through Class 10, 10 being the fastest. Don't get anything below 8 for this application, but 10 should be easy enough to come by, and in this market, still not that expensive.
Think about how you'll store it and transport it around, and therefore whether you want a carrying case-- is it going in a bag? Is it going to be strapped on you? Will you store it in a closet, or on a shelf, or what? Are you going to take it on airplanes or to foreign countries? You don't have to get a case now if you don't need one now-- the 3300 (or something) will be around next year and they'll make cases for that one that'll fit yours.
Camera accessories are for SLRs are very well standardized, from what I can see, as long as you don't try to mix and match across the Nikon/Canon chinese wall.
posted by Sunburnt at 8:03 PM on October 7, 2013
Think about how you'll store it and transport it around, and therefore whether you want a carrying case-- is it going in a bag? Is it going to be strapped on you? Will you store it in a closet, or on a shelf, or what? Are you going to take it on airplanes or to foreign countries? You don't have to get a case now if you don't need one now-- the 3300 (or something) will be around next year and they'll make cases for that one that'll fit yours.
Camera accessories are for SLRs are very well standardized, from what I can see, as long as you don't try to mix and match across the Nikon/Canon chinese wall.
posted by Sunburnt at 8:03 PM on October 7, 2013
Also, I have to disagree about advising the OP to get a 50mm f1.8 as his first lens. Prime lenses can be enormously frustrating to anyone who is used to the flexibility of zooming in an out on things, and on a cropped sensor body such as the D3200 you will need to be standing miles away from your subjects to fit them into the frame - not always possible if you are indoors.
I started out with a crappy kit lens and it was fine to begin with. The quality of photos you'll get from a DSLR sensor will still be better than on your standard point-and-shoot camera regardless of how crappy the lens is.
By all means get the 50mm 1.8 as a second or third lens down the track, but don't get it as your first lens. I would suggest upgrading to a better quality zoom lens before investing in a prime.
posted by RubyScarlet at 8:03 PM on October 7, 2013 [3 favorites]
I started out with a crappy kit lens and it was fine to begin with. The quality of photos you'll get from a DSLR sensor will still be better than on your standard point-and-shoot camera regardless of how crappy the lens is.
By all means get the 50mm 1.8 as a second or third lens down the track, but don't get it as your first lens. I would suggest upgrading to a better quality zoom lens before investing in a prime.
posted by RubyScarlet at 8:03 PM on October 7, 2013 [3 favorites]
Go to the same place - a park, a botanical garden, whatever - on a weekly basis. Take the same goddamn pictures through the year. Not "take an identical set each week", but take pictures of the same things. Note the subtle way the light is different - the angle, the quality - and how weather affects the light. Shoot at night, if you can.
By taking the location variable out of the equation, you can focus on learning *light* and your camera.
posted by notsnot at 8:44 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
By taking the location variable out of the equation, you can focus on learning *light* and your camera.
posted by notsnot at 8:44 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
RubyScarlet, part of the reason the 50/1.8 is a great recommendation because is it's restrictive, and it's only $100. Good zoom lenses aren't cheap, which you probably know.
However, I agree with you about the crop factor problem, and recommend the AF-S 35/1.8 instead, which is a similar view angle to a 50 on a full frame system plus has the super fast AF with clutch. Still cheaper and faster than a good zoom.
posted by a halcyon day at 8:45 PM on October 7, 2013 [2 favorites]
However, I agree with you about the crop factor problem, and recommend the AF-S 35/1.8 instead, which is a similar view angle to a 50 on a full frame system plus has the super fast AF with clutch. Still cheaper and faster than a good zoom.
posted by a halcyon day at 8:45 PM on October 7, 2013 [2 favorites]
Another tip that I wish I'd known about when I started photography: shoot all your photos in RAW mode rather than JPEG.
Yes, RAW files are much larger and chew up a lot of space on your memory cards, but the huge advantage is that you can instantly change the white balance of an image when you do your post-processing in software such as Lightroom.
It's very easy to get white balance wrong, and even if you don't get it 'wrong' sometimes a different white balance setting would make a particular photo look better.
If you shoot in JPEG, your post-processing options are a lot more limited.
posted by RubyScarlet at 8:46 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
Yes, RAW files are much larger and chew up a lot of space on your memory cards, but the huge advantage is that you can instantly change the white balance of an image when you do your post-processing in software such as Lightroom.
It's very easy to get white balance wrong, and even if you don't get it 'wrong' sometimes a different white balance setting would make a particular photo look better.
If you shoot in JPEG, your post-processing options are a lot more limited.
posted by RubyScarlet at 8:46 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
Regardless of what lens you use, what books you read, what sites you visit, I (like kcm) encourage the cultivation of a habit. Shoot, process, rinse, repeat. Don't stack up 500 images on a card, dump them, and end up with little time budgeted to review.
Two incredible advantages of digital photography are the rapid feedback and embedding of settings in EXIF data. If you can manage it, try to carve out a piece of time for unrushed reviewing of recent images. To my mind, photography is similar to music in that you're cultivating (at least) two skills that work in tandem, and they generally leap-frog each other in a shared path. You won't take better pictures without spending quality time looking at them. The film development process used to be a *great* place for this, but with the caveat that the frame might have been days, weeks, months (years), old, and unless you're madly obsessive (or have a data back), you don't have the exposure information recorded.
+
- Silly as it sounds, hold it properly.
- Be aware of your chimping. There are varying views on this. I don't look down on it, I just think it can be a wonderfully effective way to remove yourself from the moment.
posted by Jack Karaoke at 8:49 PM on October 7, 2013
Two incredible advantages of digital photography are the rapid feedback and embedding of settings in EXIF data. If you can manage it, try to carve out a piece of time for unrushed reviewing of recent images. To my mind, photography is similar to music in that you're cultivating (at least) two skills that work in tandem, and they generally leap-frog each other in a shared path. You won't take better pictures without spending quality time looking at them. The film development process used to be a *great* place for this, but with the caveat that the frame might have been days, weeks, months (years), old, and unless you're madly obsessive (or have a data back), you don't have the exposure information recorded.
+
- Silly as it sounds, hold it properly.
- Be aware of your chimping. There are varying views on this. I don't look down on it, I just think it can be a wonderfully effective way to remove yourself from the moment.
posted by Jack Karaoke at 8:49 PM on October 7, 2013
RubyScarlet, part of the reason the 50/1.8 is a great recommendation because is it's restrictive, and it's only $100. Good zoom lenses aren't cheap, which you probably know.
It's true that they are more expensive. (Although you could get a reasonably-quality Sigma or Tamron zoom lens for a few hundred bucks and it would still be good enough for a beginner hobbyist).
Yes, the restrictiveness of a prime lens might help someone get creative and learn more about photography when they are just starting out. But it could also be just as likely that these restrictions will prove to be frustrating and off-putting for a beginner. I know of two people who bought their first DSLRs in the last couple of years and got the 50mm 1.8 as their only lens. Both have separately commented to me that they have found it restrictive and it has probably caused them to take fewer photos than they otherwise might have.
posted by RubyScarlet at 8:57 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
It's true that they are more expensive. (Although you could get a reasonably-quality Sigma or Tamron zoom lens for a few hundred bucks and it would still be good enough for a beginner hobbyist).
Yes, the restrictiveness of a prime lens might help someone get creative and learn more about photography when they are just starting out. But it could also be just as likely that these restrictions will prove to be frustrating and off-putting for a beginner. I know of two people who bought their first DSLRs in the last couple of years and got the 50mm 1.8 as their only lens. Both have separately commented to me that they have found it restrictive and it has probably caused them to take fewer photos than they otherwise might have.
posted by RubyScarlet at 8:57 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
But it could also be just as likely that these restrictions will prove to be frustrating and off-putting for a beginner. Agreed, and that's definitely an individual personality thing. Using a zoom lens like a set of primes, ie setting it to a focal length and walking around vs. zooming the lens to compose, is also a good habit to get into.
Nobody's mentioned used gear yet— KEH and Adorama are my choice for buying gear for much less than retail, especially pro gear. KEH's rating system is also notoriously conservative so you don't have to worry about buying only their EX+ top rating. I have BGN (bargain/unrated) lenses that are totally fine mechanically and optically but show finish wear.
posted by a halcyon day at 9:15 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
Nobody's mentioned used gear yet— KEH and Adorama are my choice for buying gear for much less than retail, especially pro gear. KEH's rating system is also notoriously conservative so you don't have to worry about buying only their EX+ top rating. I have BGN (bargain/unrated) lenses that are totally fine mechanically and optically but show finish wear.
posted by a halcyon day at 9:15 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
Arrg. You'll be fine with the Nikon kit lens - it's reasonably sharp and, most likely, you would never take it off the camera even if you had more glass unless you were shooting something specific. I have taken entire trips where the kit lens was all I had and all I needed.
If you ever plan to shoot wildlife - or sports at range - I suggest the Nikon 55-200mm VR lens to fill out your range, but really, for family shots, you will be 100% fine with the kit lens, which is fast and responsive and versatile. Be aware that the entry-level Nikon cameras come without a motor in the body, which means that your lenses will have to have motors in them (and the kit lens does) in order to autofocus for you. This can trip you up, as some of the cheap Nikon lenses are NOT motorized. Check first! I mention this because that nifty fifty 1.8 is one of those lenses with no motor. Manually focusing on a child is, perhaps, not how you want to start off your relationship with your new camera.
Things I own but don't use: tripod. Tripods are fantastic for certain things; pictures of your kids ain't any of 'em. (Tripods are great for low-light photography, museums, fireworks, stars. If you're taking pictures of your kids in low-light, no magical tripod will keep the fast-moving children in focus. Use a flash.)
I shoot in RAW, but you probably don't have to; ideally you want to get the settings correct at time of shot, not when you're fiddling around afterwards. That being said, if you've got the drive space, why not?
I use Photoshop Elements to edit and it works wonderfully. You can use GIMP, but there's a reason to pay; I always found that GIMP made me want to pull my hair out, follicle by follicle. PSE is often on sale for (I think) $79 on Mother's Day or Father's Day or Xmas or Excuse For Sale Day. It has a "quick" mode for newbie photo fixing, and some organizational stuff I don't use. Of course, if you want to spend money like water, Photoshop will also work well.
Pick up a Nikon SB-400 flash ($129) and flip the reflector up indoors, to get shots with pleasant fill flash and less horrid flash colour.
You don't mention whether or not you want to get into the nuts and bolts of your camera, or if you're content with letting the camera choose for you. If you want to get a good feel for your camera, shoot with it - shoot anything with it - experiment with it constantly. It's digital. No film to waste.
I can recommend Ken Rockwell's site for interesting commentary on photography and what makes a 'good' photograph; worrying about your subject and not your gear is the first step. I used the ancestor of the D3200 for many years and took some beautiful pictures with it (and the kit lens).
"A photographer went to a socialite party in New York. As he entered the front door, the host said ‘I love your pictures - they’re wonderful; you must have a fantastic camera.’ He said nothing until dinner was finished, then: ‘That was a wonderful dinner; you must have a terrific stove."
- Sam Haskins
posted by Nyx at 9:19 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
If you ever plan to shoot wildlife - or sports at range - I suggest the Nikon 55-200mm VR lens to fill out your range, but really, for family shots, you will be 100% fine with the kit lens, which is fast and responsive and versatile. Be aware that the entry-level Nikon cameras come without a motor in the body, which means that your lenses will have to have motors in them (and the kit lens does) in order to autofocus for you. This can trip you up, as some of the cheap Nikon lenses are NOT motorized. Check first! I mention this because that nifty fifty 1.8 is one of those lenses with no motor. Manually focusing on a child is, perhaps, not how you want to start off your relationship with your new camera.
Things I own but don't use: tripod. Tripods are fantastic for certain things; pictures of your kids ain't any of 'em. (Tripods are great for low-light photography, museums, fireworks, stars. If you're taking pictures of your kids in low-light, no magical tripod will keep the fast-moving children in focus. Use a flash.)
I shoot in RAW, but you probably don't have to; ideally you want to get the settings correct at time of shot, not when you're fiddling around afterwards. That being said, if you've got the drive space, why not?
I use Photoshop Elements to edit and it works wonderfully. You can use GIMP, but there's a reason to pay; I always found that GIMP made me want to pull my hair out, follicle by follicle. PSE is often on sale for (I think) $79 on Mother's Day or Father's Day or Xmas or Excuse For Sale Day. It has a "quick" mode for newbie photo fixing, and some organizational stuff I don't use. Of course, if you want to spend money like water, Photoshop will also work well.
Pick up a Nikon SB-400 flash ($129) and flip the reflector up indoors, to get shots with pleasant fill flash and less horrid flash colour.
You don't mention whether or not you want to get into the nuts and bolts of your camera, or if you're content with letting the camera choose for you. If you want to get a good feel for your camera, shoot with it - shoot anything with it - experiment with it constantly. It's digital. No film to waste.
I can recommend Ken Rockwell's site for interesting commentary on photography and what makes a 'good' photograph; worrying about your subject and not your gear is the first step. I used the ancestor of the D3200 for many years and took some beautiful pictures with it (and the kit lens).
"A photographer went to a socialite party in New York. As he entered the front door, the host said ‘I love your pictures - they’re wonderful; you must have a fantastic camera.’ He said nothing until dinner was finished, then: ‘That was a wonderful dinner; you must have a terrific stove."
- Sam Haskins
posted by Nyx at 9:19 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
The 50mm makes a good compliment to the starter zoom, not a replacement for it. I would recommend the 50mm over the 35mm on the crop factor, as 75mm is a reasonable portrait length. The 35mm will be ~52mm equivalent which means you have to get rather close to subjects to do close portrait shots and the perspective is a bit wonky and the images a bit flat. A 35mm would be handy to have, but I'd still start with a 50mm on a DX series Nikon.
With some more thought, I remember liking this Scott Kelby video for going over composition and editing tips. The "@Google" series has some nice videos on photography, so you might explore those.
posted by Candleman at 9:21 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
With some more thought, I remember liking this Scott Kelby video for going over composition and editing tips. The "@Google" series has some nice videos on photography, so you might explore those.
posted by Candleman at 9:21 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
On composing: Fill the frame.
posted by Bruce H. at 10:00 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Bruce H. at 10:00 PM on October 7, 2013 [1 favorite]
For what it's worth, I shot 80% of my photos on the last SLR I owned (1.6X crop) with a 20mm f1.8. It was over five times as expensive as the 50mm I recommended, though, and would make an excellent addition once OP knows their next step. Or perhaps a quality zoom. An acceptable outcome is that they indeed feel restricted and purchase their next lens with that in mind.
This debate will go on forever, but I've got 20 years of experience and I finally settled on primes over zooms after initially being the other way around. I think that's common. I would pack a 20mm, 50mm, 85mm, 135mm, and 300mm if I had to cover everything, but in interest of staying light, I would generally take a 20mm for general shooting and a 100mm-ish for any action. I much prefer the price, quality, and low-light performance of a prime I can crop versus a lens that's so expensive and heavy I hesitate to take it with me.
For the record, I only carry a Canon S90 with me now, and I plan to get a Fuji X100S. I'm more of a street and landscape photographer and to each his own. The best camera is the one you have with you.
posted by kcm at 10:11 PM on October 7, 2013
This debate will go on forever, but I've got 20 years of experience and I finally settled on primes over zooms after initially being the other way around. I think that's common. I would pack a 20mm, 50mm, 85mm, 135mm, and 300mm if I had to cover everything, but in interest of staying light, I would generally take a 20mm for general shooting and a 100mm-ish for any action. I much prefer the price, quality, and low-light performance of a prime I can crop versus a lens that's so expensive and heavy I hesitate to take it with me.
For the record, I only carry a Canon S90 with me now, and I plan to get a Fuji X100S. I'm more of a street and landscape photographer and to each his own. The best camera is the one you have with you.
posted by kcm at 10:11 PM on October 7, 2013
I have to disagree about avoiding the kit lens. My father is a decent amateur photographer and he has a few prosumer grade lenses that he uses appropriately, but some of his nicest work has come from using a simple extender on a kit lens.
Broadly, there are two things you have to learn when approaching digital photography--the technology of it and the art of it. If you don't work on both things you won't get very far. My dad's work improved significantly after I lent him some of my books about traditional art--they covered composition, color theory, and lighting, mainly, with a bit of history thrown in here and there. Now he's in a position where he knows what he wants to take a picture of and how to make his camera do the things he needs it to do to get that photo.
I'm a digital/traditional painter and I'm not much of a fan of his processing software. He uses Aperture and I kind of hate it. Things that would take me 10 seconds in Photoshop are like pulling teeth in Aperture; if I were in his position, I would be using Aperture to manage my projects and Photoshop for processing. I'd encourage anyone getting into processing to consider using at least Elements with an eye toward buying Photoshop as the need arises.
I'd encourage anyone learning how to shoot to try to avoid doing too much composition in post-processing. Try to compose in frame--it makes you a stronger photographer and allows for much bigger and better prints. Primarily I'm talking about cropping--I see far too many photos where the photographer has used large crops to "find" a good composition somewhere in the shot, leaving them with a much less flexible range of final print sizes.
posted by xyzzy at 10:27 PM on October 7, 2013
Broadly, there are two things you have to learn when approaching digital photography--the technology of it and the art of it. If you don't work on both things you won't get very far. My dad's work improved significantly after I lent him some of my books about traditional art--they covered composition, color theory, and lighting, mainly, with a bit of history thrown in here and there. Now he's in a position where he knows what he wants to take a picture of and how to make his camera do the things he needs it to do to get that photo.
I'm a digital/traditional painter and I'm not much of a fan of his processing software. He uses Aperture and I kind of hate it. Things that would take me 10 seconds in Photoshop are like pulling teeth in Aperture; if I were in his position, I would be using Aperture to manage my projects and Photoshop for processing. I'd encourage anyone getting into processing to consider using at least Elements with an eye toward buying Photoshop as the need arises.
I'd encourage anyone learning how to shoot to try to avoid doing too much composition in post-processing. Try to compose in frame--it makes you a stronger photographer and allows for much bigger and better prints. Primarily I'm talking about cropping--I see far too many photos where the photographer has used large crops to "find" a good composition somewhere in the shot, leaving them with a much less flexible range of final print sizes.
posted by xyzzy at 10:27 PM on October 7, 2013
Be aware that an awful lot of "photography" magazines, websites, YouTube videos and even books are really oriented around giving you excuses to buy more camera gear. Buying lots of gear isn't the most direct route to improving your baby/family photos and portraits.
I was told years ago that photography was all about content (what you're pointing the camera at) and lighting. It took me a long time to really come to believe it, but I do. That's doubly or triply so for portraits and family photos.
posted by Western Infidels at 10:32 PM on October 7, 2013
I was told years ago that photography was all about content (what you're pointing the camera at) and lighting. It took me a long time to really come to believe it, but I do. That's doubly or triply so for portraits and family photos.
posted by Western Infidels at 10:32 PM on October 7, 2013
I'll just stick a link to my 36 Lessons set here....
posted by pjern at 11:20 PM on October 7, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by pjern at 11:20 PM on October 7, 2013 [2 favorites]
Lens: I've got a crop sensor camera and REALLY like my 35mm f/2 lens. As somebody said above, on a crop sensor, the 50mm ends up giving you an awfully small field of view; but the 35mm ends up being roughly equivalent to what a 50mm would look like on a full-frame camera. I pretty much use mine nonstop in casual walking-around snapshot situations, and the aperture makes it great for blurring the background in middle-distance portraits, which are like 80% of what I take when I'm photographing my own small child.
Post-processing and composition advice: there are some really great how-to videos on The Mindful Eye, including a series where he takes someone's fairly-good snapshot and really punches it up using Photoshop (some of the transformations are amazing). You have to sign up for the site to view videos, but it's free, requires only an email address, and I've never gotten any weird spam from them.
posted by Bardolph at 5:50 AM on October 8, 2013
Post-processing and composition advice: there are some really great how-to videos on The Mindful Eye, including a series where he takes someone's fairly-good snapshot and really punches it up using Photoshop (some of the transformations are amazing). You have to sign up for the site to view videos, but it's free, requires only an email address, and I've never gotten any weird spam from them.
posted by Bardolph at 5:50 AM on October 8, 2013
One more thing to remember about having eighty prime lenses versus the kit lens: do you really, really want to be screwing with your lens while your kid's trying to take their first steps? Do you want to be the guy who's stripping off his 50 and putting on his 35 while your beloved child smiles up at you, walks a step, and then falls down and giggles mightily? Or would you like to be the person who's moving back and forth to take shots around living room furniture because composing in a prime requires the two-foot zoom - moving around on your own two feet? I can switch lenses in about ten seconds, because I've done it a thousand and some times (it may take you longer). Ten seconds is an eternity. Ten seconds is fully long enough for the light to fade, the person or animal to turn or move away, the wind to pick up and start tossing your subject from side to side. Don't put any more time between you and the camera than you have to.
Prime lenses are great, wonderful, I have a prime from the sixties that I love and enjoy on my own SLR. But I use it for specific stuff, like studio photography, or getting a specific landscape shot, or flower shot, or whatever. I also keep in mind that while a prime wide-open (with a wide aperture) does make low-light shots easier, it also means that - at f 1.8 - very little of the plane will be in focus. You will be getting a nose with blurry eyes, or eyes and blurry hairline. Interesting effects, maybe. Probably not what you want when just starting out.
I reiterate: the 18-55mm kit lens is sharp and fast and, at f 5.6, you'll still get lovely bokeh (the quality of the blurred background areas, to paraphrase). With the SB-400, you will be able to take the family shots you want indoors. There's so much value in being able to pick up a camera and just shoot - that is how you capture the beauty, not in messing around with your gear while the light fades and people turn their heads or lose their smiles.
Later on, a 50mm is probably not a bad idea for portraits of your family, when they understand "sit still", and using the kit lens will not prevent you from understanding the basics of composition. And as I mentioned, a zoom lens can be nice for sports, if you want to take pictures of your child and not the entire field. Right now, you're fine with the kit you're buying.
posted by Nyx at 9:36 AM on October 8, 2013
Prime lenses are great, wonderful, I have a prime from the sixties that I love and enjoy on my own SLR. But I use it for specific stuff, like studio photography, or getting a specific landscape shot, or flower shot, or whatever. I also keep in mind that while a prime wide-open (with a wide aperture) does make low-light shots easier, it also means that - at f 1.8 - very little of the plane will be in focus. You will be getting a nose with blurry eyes, or eyes and blurry hairline. Interesting effects, maybe. Probably not what you want when just starting out.
I reiterate: the 18-55mm kit lens is sharp and fast and, at f 5.6, you'll still get lovely bokeh (the quality of the blurred background areas, to paraphrase). With the SB-400, you will be able to take the family shots you want indoors. There's so much value in being able to pick up a camera and just shoot - that is how you capture the beauty, not in messing around with your gear while the light fades and people turn their heads or lose their smiles.
Later on, a 50mm is probably not a bad idea for portraits of your family, when they understand "sit still", and using the kit lens will not prevent you from understanding the basics of composition. And as I mentioned, a zoom lens can be nice for sports, if you want to take pictures of your child and not the entire field. Right now, you're fine with the kit you're buying.
posted by Nyx at 9:36 AM on October 8, 2013
I've been watching and enjoying the photography course offered by The Great Courses. (All their courses go on sale at deep discounts at least twice a year, so if you're interested, wait until it's on sale--I paid $60, not the $200+ there today.)
posted by telophase at 11:34 AM on October 8, 2013
posted by telophase at 11:34 AM on October 8, 2013
Judging from your Flickr site linked in your profile you are not unfamiliar with photography. You have some nice images there. You have chosen a nice DSLR and it will allow you many additional nice images I am sure. Come January I imagine your camera will be mostly concentrated on your baby and family in general. Until they start moving babies are very easy subjects. Natural light, such as diffuse sun coming in through a window flatters most babies. Harsh on camera flash does not. A separate flash with the ability to bounce or diffuse the light will help if you do want to use flash. Another trick is to use aperture priority and a wider aperture (lower f number) to let more natural light in so that the camera flash is not dominant. Fill your frame, photograph daily life such as baths, eating etc. and of course get some nice shots of baby and mom, baby and dad, baby's face in close. With your kit lens if you zoom in and open up the aperture the background will become out of focus and less distracting. There are usually lots of great colors around babies so have fun, but conversions to B&W can be stunning for portraits. Have fun, you really have to work hard to take bad baby pictures and your basic kit lens and camera will serve you well. If you are looking to invest I would start with a bounce flash and a flash diffuser (I like Lumiquest) and then maybe that nifty fifty lens that so many are proposing. It will give you low light capability and opened up to 1.8 or 2.0 or so will give you a shallow depth of field for a nice portrait. Focus on the eyes in such situation, you want the closest eye to be the most in focus point. Your local library should have some nice books on photographic composition and perhaps even baby photography and the price is right.
posted by caddis at 2:34 PM on October 8, 2013
posted by caddis at 2:34 PM on October 8, 2013
Response by poster: Wow, thanks all! There's a lot to think about here.
I do plan to shoot in RAW - since I do a lot of scientific imaging, putting of JPEG conversion and information loss until later in the process makes a lot of sense.
I like the idea of getting a f/1.8 lens, but I'm curious about people's take on the 50 mm/1.8 with no AF versus the 35mm/1.8 with AF. I guess to some extent I can see the difference in focal length with my kit lens but I am curious to hear how frustrating the lack of AF is.
I also intend to get a flash, probably the SB400 mentioned above, so that I can do bounce illumination.
posted by pombe at 3:03 PM on October 8, 2013
I do plan to shoot in RAW - since I do a lot of scientific imaging, putting of JPEG conversion and information loss until later in the process makes a lot of sense.
I like the idea of getting a f/1.8 lens, but I'm curious about people's take on the 50 mm/1.8 with no AF versus the 35mm/1.8 with AF. I guess to some extent I can see the difference in focal length with my kit lens but I am curious to hear how frustrating the lack of AF is.
I also intend to get a flash, probably the SB400 mentioned above, so that I can do bounce illumination.
posted by pombe at 3:03 PM on October 8, 2013
An af 50 1.8 is the right price. Manual focus is tricky on today's cameras. They don't have the fine ground glass screens like the old manual cameras. Also, babies move making af quite welcome.
posted by caddis at 4:09 PM on October 8, 2013
posted by caddis at 4:09 PM on October 8, 2013
The new 50mm 1.8 G works with the D3200 in af mode. More on lens compatibility. These links are to Ken Rockwell, a somewhat opinionated and some might say controversial source. Regardless of how some might feel about his opinions, he provides tons of useful factual information. Here are a few photo links to keep you busy for some time.
posted by caddis at 8:01 PM on October 8, 2013
posted by caddis at 8:01 PM on October 8, 2013
Two things:
1. Take a lot of photos.
2. Don't get hung up on equipment.
Almost all photography discussion is about the second thing and not the first. Photography is 90% person, 10% equipment. Find a meetup, friends, local photography club, etc. that will get you out taking photos.
My advice is simple not because I don't want to spend the time, but because it's genuinely the best advice I can give you.
posted by cnc at 2:27 PM on October 9, 2013 [1 favorite]
1. Take a lot of photos.
2. Don't get hung up on equipment.
Almost all photography discussion is about the second thing and not the first. Photography is 90% person, 10% equipment. Find a meetup, friends, local photography club, etc. that will get you out taking photos.
My advice is simple not because I don't want to spend the time, but because it's genuinely the best advice I can give you.
posted by cnc at 2:27 PM on October 9, 2013 [1 favorite]
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by blaneyphoto at 6:50 PM on October 7, 2013