Question of the Day | Is it worth the switch from Nikon?

Q: We just recently bought a Nikon D3000. We like it because it offers a “Guide” mode which is basically the idiots guide to taking a great photo. Good for a novice like myself…

But, we would like to get a few new lenses and I’m finding that not all of the lenses autofocus on this camera. We are thinking of bagging it altogether and getting a different entry level DSLR. Any thoughts on the Canon or Pentax? We feel like we are samrt people and capable fo taking great photos even without the special Guide mode. Thanks!

A: Thanks for your question! Kim and I did a two-parter to give some varying perspective. :)

• Kimberly says…

Thanks for the question, fellow Nikonian! Well, at least for the moment…

So, you’re absolutely right. Not all lenses will auto-focus on this camera - specifically, only AF-S lenses will do the job. In addition to that, if I may say, you have a couple things working against you with that model.

Guide mode, although quite handy, most other Nikon DSLRs - D60 & D90 have just as easy of a guide to navigate through, with a question mark for each topic to teach you a few things along the way. And since you and hubby are fairly quick learners, I feel you can easily get by with those alternative guides.

The D3000 has been known to be riddled with problems and has been quite disappointing based on several consumer reviews. I wanna give you the straight up goods, so here are a few of the reasons why.

• LCD- Not as sharp as even the D40, (discontinued) D60 or the D90.
• It’s a much slower camera, coupled with a cumbersome operation - already, me no likey.  I believe it to be ergonomically challenged. :)
• ISO- Not sure where you are writing from - but around these here parts - ISO can be my best friend sometimes. Unfortunately, as much as I love Toronto - it sure isn’t sunny San Diego with ideal shooting conditions and glorious light all year round. So to be restricted to 800 ISO or less, that’s definitely a no-no in my books. This leads to inferior quality of image which is *not* what you want for your precious photos!
• Live view - inconvenient - you *must* hit the play button to check your most recent image vs. it automatically popping up on the screen immediately after the shot. This is big for me. With kids you have *little* time to be doing anything other than capturing what they’re doing at *that* moment. Sometimes, we only have 2 seconds to catch something great. So to make me fiddle with the camera to check to make sure that I’m on track takes away from the time I could be spending, clicking away and snapping some shots.

So- with that said, I want to offer my recommendations, keeping with Nikon- since you have the investment of the lens and well, I really like these next couple cameras! I will note the pros and cons of each DSLR and *you* can make the call on which is best for you and hubby. :) You can’t go wrong with either!

D5000 - $569.99 CDN

• great price point for a fantastic DSLR
• superior ‘Quite Mode’
• ISO - shoots up to 6400 ( although, you’re pushing it after 3200. )
• 2.7” LCD
• less control buttons than the D90, which forces you to rely on the menu much more
• video mode
• excellent image quality
• easy to handle

D90 - $699 CDN

• great price point for an excellent camera.
• does not offer ‘Quite Mode’
• ISO - shoots up to 6400 ( same as D5000 - pushing it after 3200 )
• 3” LCD screen - sharp, sharp, sharp!
• better control buttons ( superior feature ) allowing you to get to the settings that you want *much* quicker and without having to go through the menu
• video mode
• slightly better technical image quality
• better ergonomics - making it easier to get to the menu screen
• easy handling
• high performance
• better in low light conditions
• Older AF-S lenses will work with the D90.
• The D90 has been around since 2008 - which says a lot these days with companies always feeling the need to upgrade or discontinue or modify - the D90 is a great entry level camera that has stood the test of time. At least, in camera years!

In short, for an additional $130 - you can make the jump to the D90 and have: slightly better image quality, a faster camera, larger screen, better control features, compatibility with older AF-S lenses and better ergonomics.

OR you can go with the D5000 and take that $130 and invest in a prime lens (unless you’re a zoom kind of gal! :) ) such as the 35mm f1.8? The 35mm will give you a *true* 50mm focal length, when you factor in the crop sensor with the D5000 or the D90.

• Tamara says…

I agree with Kimberly. But since saying “ditto” would be relatively short ending, I’ll say investing in a new Nikon body and keeping your family of lenses is an easy and ideal road to travel.

I don’t want to imply that, once you’ve become stuck in with a brand, you’re stuck for good. But it’s a costly switch so there is definitely an element of “switch now or forever hold onto your purse strings.”

Nikon, Canon and Pentax are industry leaders for a reason but every manufacturer has a few skeletons in their closet relating to makes and models that just aren’t up to their usual standard.

I would investigate Kim’s alternatives before making the jump. That said, if you do decide to cross over, have a peek at this post where I recommend both a Canon and a Pentax option to choose from.

Happy shopping and we hope we were able to help!

16 December 2 Permalink

Question A Day: Baseline DSLR

Q: countryfair asked:

I have always loved photography but haven’t really gotten into it since high school. Now that I have a little girl, I’ve been taking pictures like crazy. I want to upgrade my camera to a dslr. I am familiar with Canon’s so will go with them, but do think their baseline Rebel XS is a good camera, or should I splurge on the Rebel T1i? I am planning on learning how to really use the camera, but imagine I will mostly use the auto settings.

Thanks for your help. I love both your websites!

A: Thanks! And thank you for the question!

Here’s the thing: the Canon Rebel line is a great line, but there are shortcomings of the XS in particular that I feel are valuable to consider.

The Canon XS is currently retailing for about $580 CAD with a kit lens. The XS came out in 2008 and, as such, doesn’t have any movie capabilities. The T1i, its big brother, does have a movie capability and a higher megapixel count at around 15MP vs. 10MP.

The T1i is currently retailing for around $800 CAD. For that extra few hundred, you’re getting a remarkably better camera that you could most definitely grow into, but if you don’t think you need those extra oomph-factor features, it’s definitely not going to be money well spent.

I know you said you’re familiar with Canon, but maybe consider looking into this other option as well: the Pentax K-x which retails for about $620 with a kit lens, making it just a smidge higher in price than the XS. The thing I like about this camera vs. the Canon XS is that it’s low noise for a high ISO, 12MP, movie capabilities and an image stabilizer mechanism that is quite, quite popular.

Automatic modes are incredibly handy, and if you’re looking for a camera that will take great pics while it does the majority of the math on the settings, this might be a great option for you. Even if you have a separate movie recording device, I know from personal experience it can be really handy having it all in one so maybe consider the Pentax just to see? I just think it might give your pics that extra edge with the increased MP count, image stabilization (never hurts with little ones!) and so on.

That said, I truly believe you buy the best equipment you can afford and you make it work with attention to detail as the user. Trust me: a $10,000 camera is just as capable of taking a bad photo as a $100 one is. After all, my first DSLR is still capable of snapping a great pic if all the settings are in place properly! It’s about practice making perfect just as much as it is about the equipment.

Enjoy, and I hope that helps!

xo, Tamara

4 November 6 Permalink

Question a Day | Lens hood? Or not?

Q: I just bought a Nikon D3000 and opted for a few extra accessories: mostly filters from Polaroid (UV, Polarizer, Fluorescent as well as a set of Macro Filters), a larger & higher speed memory card as well as a remote. I’m looking at buying a lens hood and am wondering what the best option is and what are the noticeable differences between Bayonet, Tulip, Hard & Soft, etc. OR are there other accesories I should consider BEFOREa lens hood? I’m either thinking about an off camera flash or saving up for another lens.

— Esther, estherandcasey.blogspot.com

A: Congrats on your purchases! You’re definitely off to a well thought out start in terms of accessories. 

My super-fast and totally personal opinion answer: don’t bother with a lens hood, or just get the cheapie rubber collapsable one, saving money towards future investments in yes, an off-camera flash and/or another lens (or two! or three!)

Long answer would be…

Lens hoods are used for both an obvious reason and a not so obvious one: a) to block stray light from entering the field of view and b) to protect the lens from (reasonable) bangs and bumps. 

The differences between the various lens hoods and their shapes are all about how they filter and block light. You can leave them on all of the time, not just for high sun situations, and only need to truly mind the results of them in low light scenarios or if you’re using a camera’s built-in flash. A visit to your local camera store should help you pick the exact one that fits your creative needs, and they should let you test each one out by the window or door to see its effect, and if you like it. 

Here is my messy closet, from a little series I took yesterday for this blog. 

Manual | 1/125 @ f/3.5, ISO 800, Exposure Bracket +1

This photo, aside from telling you all this week I am cleaning out my closet, shows a few things. Additional details include:

1. Rubber lens hood was folded back: I usually have it this way. Personally, I find I don’t use my lens hood as often as I thought I might, which is why I’m pleased I only spent $12 on the soft one rather than more for the hard one. Why do I keep it attached? It’s like a rubber guard for protection when I set the camera down. 
2. Focal length of 17mm (wide angle effect): Since the focal length of the lens was all the way back to 17mm, a dark vignette feature shows up in the corners. Those dark edges are from the lens hood, and only show up when the lens is completely zoomed out. They’re easy enough to crop or digitally remove, if I don’t like them, so I never worry too much. But it’s something to consider. 
3. Linear polarizer filter used on lens: The polarizing lens filter was a worthy investment as it naturally punches up colour saturation and contrast. Further, it protects the glass of your lens; ie. it’s easier to replace a $100 filter than it is a $1,200 lens. 

Here’s one of Isla leaning on a toy with the light coming through the window at about a 45 degree angle. Focal length is 35mm (to show there are no dark corners) and the lens hood was not popped open. 

Manual | 1/125 @ f/3.5, ISO 800, Exposure Bracket +1

Here’s another one of Isla crawling away from the toy, now parallel with the window. Focal length is 35mm again, but the lens hood was popped open. You can see it’s a touch darker but not enough to cry over. The white of her onesie looks better, and the colours are more even. It goes to show it’s a personal choice as to what your desired results are!

Manual | 1/125 @ f/3.5, ISO 800, Exposure Bracket +1

Further, you can always create a quickie DIY ‘lens hood’ from a sheet of paper taped around the lens if you’re in a pinch. There are lots of ways to control the light (diffusers, reflectors, etc.) so just experiment, double check on return policies if you don’t like the results from the product, and most importantly…

Have fun! 

23 July 3 Permalink

Question a Day | How to Shoot Fireworks!

Q: thethimehascome asked:

My husband and I are headed to the Montreal fireworks competition at the end of the month and I was hoping to take some decent pictures. I was wondering if you had any suggestions on settings etc? I have a Nikon D60 and am relatively new at playing with the settings.

P.S. Sorry this isn’t about taking pictures of children! :)

A: Ha! That’s perfectly dandy with me! I find them quite similar, oftentimes myself! 

My advice would be to first and foremost, use a tripod or some sort of makeshift tripod. You want the camera to be as steady as can be. Also, if you can, use a cable release or remote control and set yourself up in an area where you have a good view but won’t be knocked or trampled by other people, thus blurring your images. 

For your settings, ISO is fine at 100. 

Set your aperture at the beginning around f/6.3 to f/16 and see what you like. You can always adjust quickly from either side.

If you want your pictures to look like there were multiple, fantastical bursts all at once, switch over to B or Bulb mode (check your manual). What happens is that you press the shutter button down and the “film” will only draw on it where there is light, such as multiple fireworks bursts. You then release the button. Do this a few times with various lengths of time pressing the shutter button, and you’ll soon find what works and what doesn’t for you. Ah, the glory of digital. 

If that seems too risque for your first time out, you’ll want a slow shutter speed. Like 4 or 8. 

Also, turn off auto focus and switch to infinity mode (again with that manual for specific step-by-steps) for optimum results. 

Those will be stunning; Montreal puts on a great show, so have fun!

16 July 5 Permalink

Question a Day | All Subjects in Focus

Q: Anonymous asked:

how do i make sure that the whole picture is in focus? do i have to increase my aperture? i have the canon 24-70mm l 2.8

A: Good question! Yes, you want to boost the number of the aperture in order to gather more things in the frame to be in focus. 

At f/2.8, your lens will automatically lock onto the item closest to the camera and give sweet bokeh in the background. This is good for a single person portrait or object. 

At, let’s say f/5.6, you’re going to get a bit more in focus but still have some bokeh to play with. This is good for two or three people, etc. I photograph a lot of my newborn shots starting with this aperture. 

At, say f/9, you’re going to start getting everything sharp and in focus, and it will only increase from there. This is good for a hearty group shot, landscape, etc. 

These numbers are not hard and fast rules/recipes. Play around depending on your conditions, equipment and subject matter to find the right one for you! 

And remember to compensate with your other settings to accommodate the loss of light, such as shutter speed, ISO and exposure bracket. 

•••

I’m back! Computer troubles had me drowning my sorrows in a random jar of Nutella that was mysteriously left in my office… And this blog is difficult to update effectively on an iPhone app! Updates are coming along, as is a site redesign! Thanks everyone for your continued interest, enthusiasm and patience!

12 July 2 Permalink

Weekly DIY | Pop-up / On Camera Flash Diffusers

Problem? On-camera flashes that wash out the subjects and details. 

Need? Something to diffuse the light, forcing it to weaken, bounce and reflect/deflect and provide even exposure, flattering skin tones and attention to detail. 

Solution? A diffuser! 

This can be used for both DSLR users as well as point and shoot cameras. It can even be modified and used on an external flash. 

-

We’ve all been there: Low light, flash needed, but the results are truly dreadful. Even with post-production correction, the photos are often tinged with all the wrong tones and just don’t look how our mind’s eye saw them. 

Even Miss Dolly’s been a victim of bad lighting…

Auto | w/ flash disabled.

Auto | w/ pop-up flash.

Auto | w/ pop-up flash diffused by a sheet of 8.5x11 scrap paper. Yuh-huh!

Cool, eh? 

You can buy diffusers for every kind of flash, whether they be on-camera or external. On-camera ones aren’t very expensive, such as:

This one from LumiQuest for $13.95 USD. 

Or this Gary Fong Puffer on Amazon for about $20 USD.

See? Hardly a major financial commitment. And they do wonders for skin tone and shadows, especially on faces. But they will more or less do the same job as my cheapie “in a pinch” solution, if you must know. 

Yes, folks. Taping a piece of paper around the flash of your camera will help diffuse the light like above. Look at the difference it made in Dolly’s complexion. Her detail. Worth digging into the soon-to-be-shred pile, no?

You can experiment with leaving the sides open for the light to escape, or going origami-style and folding the paper into a box to completely surround the flash. 

You can even, if you’re feeling ambitious, cut the paper to size. Novel, isn’t it?

Other options include paper towel, bubble wrap, used dryer sheet or two, a piece of a plastic soft 3-ring binder, an old empty white film canister like these Photojojo guys, or get real fancy like these Instructables guys with a wire hanger… Basically, you want something that’s semi-opaque and white so that the light is gently bounced and made weaker before it hits your subject. 

For a point and shoot camera, go with the more flexible options (paper towel, paper, dryer sheets, etc.) and be sure to leave a bit of room, not fixing the diffuser directly to the flash. Rule of thumb is to bounce the light, not smush it. 

Have fun!

Tamara

29 June 15 Permalink

Question A Day | Low Light Limbo w/ Canon (or any) DSLR

Q: Hi Tamara! 

Congrats on the beautiful site! Love it! I hope you don’t mind; I added a link to you on my blog, Wee Bits by Suzanne. 

Here’s my question for you… What setting would you suggest using during the late evening when the house is dark (no natural light)? I hate using the flash as it seems to make faces look ghost like and shadowy. Hhhhmm.. I’m still getting used to my Canon Rebel. It seems as though I have a ways to go. Thanks Tamara! I look forward to following you!

— Suzanne

A: Hi Suzanne: Thanks for the link and the follow and, while we’re at it, the question too! Much appreciated!

Setting for low light, late evening force our hand on three options:

• high ISO with the reality and risk of noise, 
• P (Program) mode and the ability to stay very, very still to keep blur at bay,
• and, finally, some sort of flash.

Aw, shucks. I know. Flash can be a mood killer, especially external flashes which are bulky and scream “hey, look at me!”

But there are options before we get there…

We looked at high ISO last week* here.

Program mode continues to be a favourite of mine. Just the other night I wanted to continue documenting Isla’s sleep strike and P-mode served me well, catching the low light off the lamp and accurately reflecting both the environment of the room as well as our contented mood. But it didn’t start that way.

Auto | w/ External Flash pointed/bounced off white ceiling

Blech. Not what I was looking for. Here’s where P-mode stepped in.

Program | w/ camera resting on countertop as makeshift tripod

Note the reflection of the quartz surface bouncing in the left corner… Artistic? Maybe. But also a bit distracting. 

Program | w/ camera resting on dining table as tripod, eliminating reflection

Program | w/ camera on table, using 10 sec. self timer

Now, these can all be slightly lightened and adjusted in post-production, but for now — SOOC — they tell a fine tale for our purposes. The key for low light is having a steady hand which, I don’t know about you but by day’s end I don’t. I use objects found around me (books, tables, etc.) as tripods and the self-timer or even a wireless remote control to keep the camera still and away from my tired hands. Then, the only battle is keeping the subjects still. 

Flash can be used effectively, as in way more effectively than my photo up above. That is coming in the next post!

* I think my week/end’s worth of queued posts got lost in the glitch last week! Thanks to everyone who participated in the survey; I’m running all previously scheduled posts this week, including the winner of the 7x7 photo book! 

29 June 8 Permalink

} Over Exposure. 

This one is for DSLRs and uses Manual mode.

Maybe it’s the rain this today, but this seems like a good project to start experimenting with as we head into the summer. It’s a year-round technique, but one you have to practice with — and I mean practice — in order to not lose what you intended to capture in the first place. Summer can be the easiest time to screw it up (and I have, oh boy, I have) so mastering it now gets all that hard work done and over with.

Over exposing an image with a digital SLR is tricky; you don’t want to blow out the pixels completely (this gives a blank white spot in the image, particularly horrid on faces) so the challenge is to apply just enough control on the camera but not overdo it, essentially creating light that isn’t there.

There are two ways to control the exposure on your image at the point of shooting; with the settings (ISO, shutter speed and aperture) or/and with the exposure bracket. I tend to rely on the former, but the latter can be just as useful and even put into play in modes other than ‘manual’.

Because many camera models will have you arrive at adjusting the exposure bracket differently, I’m going to say to defer to your manual for the how-to there. Once you’re there, it’s easy; one way over exposes, one way under exposes. The desired results are subjective so have fun with it!

Manual | 1/80 @ f/3.5, ISO 640

How to get this image here? This is done in ‘manual’ controlling the shutter speed (1/80, for example), aperture (f/3.5, for example) and ISO (640, for example). To correctly get that photo, I would probably have done a recipe of around 1/200 @ f/3.5 with an ISO of 400. If 1/80 is going to be slow of a shutter speed, you can try increasing the ISO or opening the aperture more (if possible). 

It’s by no means a perfect-perfect image, but therein lies the trade off. I’m getting some blur on Isla’s arm. I’m getting a mixed exposure because we still had light coming in from the left through the window. And I’m noisy in the corners, and losing pixels in Hamish’s shirt stripes. 

But… This photo makes me think of a dreamy Saturday morning without a care in the world (even if it was nearing bedtime on an otherwise chaotic day) so I’ll take the cons for the pro. 

Your results will be varied based on your preference for how light or dark a photo is. 

Photos done with an eye for over exposure also look nice in black and white, with sometimes dramatic contrast you might not otherwise get from a perfectly balanced shot. I then upped the contrast a little more like the contrast-junkie I am. 

Start to experiment around the house with everyday photos until you get the hang of it. Once you’ve found the combinations that suit your style the most, mix it into your shooting rotation as a sure-thing refresher for those albums. 

9 June 5 Permalink

} RULE OF THIRDS

Here’s a project for everyone, whether you’ve got a camera phone, point and shoot or DSLR. It’s a note on composition, and I hope everyone gives it a try this week!

•••

Often times we pick up the camera and then move it to ensure our subject is front and center. But now we’re going to start thinking about the rule of thirds, art’s most basic composition guideline.

Think about it: most often, we catch ourselves gazing adoringly at our children from the corner of our eye. This is kinda-sorta going down that path, and is fun to explore as it adds an arty, unique edge to what could otherwise be a regular ol’ photo. 

The rule of thirds hereby decrees that an image be broken up into nine equal segments, and the subject should cross paths with one of those points — rather than be right in the middle of the image — to create a dynamic focal point for the viewer’s eye. 

Here are some examples, first with Isla’s cousin Emma, and the next two of her a long, long time ago. 

Obviously, the rules aren’t hard and fast, and your photos won’t have lines running through them. Take the pictures you’d normally go to take, but play around with your composition, shifting your camera just ever so slightly. Even just having it so that the weight of a subject avoids being straight smack in the middle center will help you to experiment with thinking twice before pressing the shutter when composing a quick shot. 

Some more random examples I pulled from my archive o’ Isla n’ Emma…

3 June 9 Permalink

Hi Tamara,

I just discovered your site today after the posting on Dear Baby, and I LOVE it! I took a 2-day photography class about two months ago and everything I learned is still sinking in. I love the simple terms you describe things in AND the visual aids, oh and that you put the exposure settings! Thank you! Thank you!

Anyway, my question. I learned in my class that many professional photographers use wide angle lenses. I am wondering if you use one and if so, if you would recommend others having one?

Thanks!
Alecia 

http://hoobingfamilyadventures.com, http://toocuteforwords.org

Thanks Alicia! And welcome!

A wide angle lens is anything really with a focal under 35mm, with extreme wide angles falling under the 21mm. They are fantastic for nature and travel as they pack a full frame of subject-y goodness and don’t discriminate on focus.

Wide angle lenses are very cool and can accomplish some pretty awesome things. But some awesome specific things. Many wedding and event photographers live and breathe by their wide angle lenses for group shots of congregations and bridal parties, but for me n’ Isla day to day I don’t think I’d go wider than what I have right now, a 17-55mm.

It’s an artistic preference as wide angles (especially extreme ones like 14mm or 10mm) head into the fisheye realm and can really distort your subject. But this can be what you’re looking for, such as below. Wide angles can make a tall person seem short, a short person seem tall, a nose seem larger than life… They can be really fun! But they can alter “reality” if not framed right when taking the picture. 

My go-to lens these days has been a 17-55mm which could be considered wide angle by some gangs n’ groups. I find this lens gives me an affordable* and quality lens with enough flexibility for a sweet portrait or on-the-run action shot. But if I get too close, I get the above. For that photo I would normally switch to my 50mm fixed lens but the distortion actually added to the comedic notion that Isla was using her arm to eat her cracker. Just proof that it’s all about what you’re looking to achieve, which is unfortunately my non-advice advice. Basically, I wouldn’t start with an extreme wide angle, but when time, money and necessity present themselves, have at it and enjoy!

* I say affordable because pro lenses for my new line of work reach and climb into the multi multi multi hundreds and this seemed to give me the most bang for my work buck. If you’re looking for a recreational lens with a range of flexibility, something in the 18-135mm range is a good and well-priced place to start. 

3 June 2 Permalink

More on BOKEH with a pinch of auto focus

Here are some notes connecting bokeh with auto focus and how the two can become trademark tools. I should add that I rarely manual focus anymore and only do when my subject is stationary. With a baby, nuh-uh. Hasn’t happened yet. But it’s a personal choice, and an option most lenses afford you with. 

Auto focus is when you half-press the shutter to reveal focus points. The camera will usually beep or the focus point may even blink telling you your focal point is locked. It’s then you press the shutter fully and the picture is snapped. With a large f/stop (small aperture), many focus points will show up as everything in the foreground and background will be sharp. With a small f/stop (large aperture), you may only get one or two. And even then, your camera will need to determine something of contrast before it locks a focal point. 

For example, the camera auto focused on Isla’s eyes, nose and lips. Once it locked, I clicked and got this shot featuring blur on both arms and down onto her romper. 

1/320 at f/2.8, ISO 800

See? A closer look…

Now, if you hold your finger in the half-press, you can lock the focus and reposition the camera, therefore recomposing the shot. This is key when using a small f/stop to get a large aperture for lots of yummy bokeh blur. 

That’s how I got this while we were just hanging on the couch:
1/320 at f/2.8, ISO 800
When I first half-pressed the shutter, the focus points rested on her toy. I then shifted the entire camera to point directly at Isla, half-pressed so her eye and ear were highlighted, kept my finger half-pressed on the locked focus and turned back to frame the shot this way. 
A closer look…

Even if bokeh is beyond old news to you and all “Camera 101” that has you rolling your eyes in the back row, take this week to play around with aperture either in manual or aperture priority. Once you know inside and out your sweet spots of blur, taking pictures on the fly without scratching your head over f/stops is in your future. Totally. A little birdie even told me so.

25 May 5 Permalink

Aperture priority. In a word: HANDY.

Ahhh. Aperture. Friend. Occasional frenemy. It’s the backwards, confusing mechanism of technical photography that usually has people reverting back to auto. It works like your eyes in terms of letting light into the camera: when it’s dark, your pupils are wide open and when it’s bright and sunny, they’re snapped tight.

Some notes on aperture:

• bigger f/stop (number) = the more your aperture is closed
• smaller f/stop (number) = the more your aperture is open

Aperture has a very intimate relationship with depth of field (DOF) which gives those dreamy, blurry shots with lots of bokeh or makes sure everything is in focus. 

Some notes on depth of field:

• what the heck is ‘bokeh’? it’s the (deliberate) blur in a photograph
• keep everything sharp/in focus = small aperture / large f/number
• make things blurry/bokeh = large aperture / small f/number

The easiest way to control exposure but take control of aperture is to put your DSLR into aperture priority mode (Av for Canon and A for Nikon). You set the aperture based on your lens and the camera will do the math on the rest. Good deal. 

For landscapes, group shots or times when you want everything in focus, etc. I tend to start at f/11 and adjust from there. Here, everything is in focus from the baby to the table to her highchair. 

1/250 at f/11, ISO 400

For up close shots or to get more creative, I drop to the lowest f/number available (f/1.8 on my 50mm, for example) and adjust from there. Here, you’ll see the foreground and background are blurred with only the elephant sharp. 

1/125 at f/1.8, ISO 800

For lil’ faces, I stick to a sweet spot around f/5.6 or close enough to give their face and full body focus but add some bokeh to the background. Here, you’ll see her main facial features are sharp but it starts to blur out as it hits the ears and bedspread. 

1/125 at f/5.6, ISO 100

Keep in mind that bokeh — however much or little of it — is a personal choice and artistically subjective. Have fun with it and experiment! Take a picture of a toy propped up on a table using a few different f/stops and compare the results for yourself!

25 May 4 Permalink