Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
PhotoKB Home
Discussion Groups
Digital Photography
Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot Cameras
Film Photography
35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther Equipment
Photo Technique
Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique General
General Photo Topics
General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK Photography
DirectoryPhoto Clubs

Photo Forum / General Photo Topics / Australian Photography / July 2009

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Canon's tips for semi-pros

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Bertram Paul - 28 Apr 2009 11:39 GMT
I'm starting to wonder about the IQ (not meaning Image Quality) of Canon
shooters or at least how Canon seems to "rate" them.
These are Tips for semi-pros:

"Individual portraits and group photographs
The smaller the aperture, the greater the depth of field. Use a larger
aperture for an individual portrait
(for example F8). This will accentuate the person you are photographing. If
you would you like to shoot
a group photograph in which everyone is sharply in focus, select a smaller
aperture, for example F16.
Try using both possibilities step by step in a single situation and compare
the results with each other.
Look especially at depth and blur."

I guess it was too difficult for them to include information about the
difference between tele and wide angle lenses.
Maybe that's in the real Pro advice?

"If your camera allows *this, you can adjust the light metering
yourself. Consider beforehand which part of the photograph
you want to be properly lit. **In the case of a portrait, this will
usually be the face. With 'partial spot metering' you can
measure very precisely. Certainly in difficult situations,
such as high contrasts, this can be worthwhile."

*LOL, which "semi-pro" shoots with a camera that doesn't allow this?
Caramba! Even my old crappy Powershot has 3 different light metring modes.
**I wouldn't have guessed this one....

Signature

---
Bertram Paul
http://atlantic-diesel.com
Digital Photography Forum

Me - 28 Apr 2009 11:53 GMT
> I'm starting to wonder about the IQ (not meaning Image Quality) of Canon
> shooters or at least how Canon seems to "rate" them.
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
> Caramba! Even my old crappy Powershot has 3 different light metring modes.
> **I wouldn't have guessed this one....

I know it seems lame, but take a look at the forums on DPReview, and
you'll see people posting even dumber questions in the "serious" camera
forums (ie 1D/s 5d and D1-D3). Many of them have listed in their profile
many thousands of dollars worth of new equipment that reads like a list
of "must have best" gear compiled by people who do know - but usually
can't afford it.
Huge - 28 Apr 2009 12:26 GMT
>> *LOL, which "semi-pro" shoots with a camera that doesn't allow this?
>> Caramba! Even my old crappy Powershot has 3 different light metring modes.
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> of "must have best" gear compiled by people who do know - but usually
> can't afford it.

Usually referred to in all fields, not just photography, by the epithet "All
the gear but no idea."

Signature

"The study of theology... is the study of nothing; it is founded on nothing; it
rests on no principles; it proceeds by no authority; it has no data; it can
demonstrate nothing; and it admits of no conclusion."
           [email me at huge {at} huge (dot) org <dot> uk]

Robert Spanjaard - 28 Apr 2009 12:31 GMT
> I'm starting to wonder about the IQ (not meaning Image Quality) of Canon
> shooters or at least how Canon seems to "rate" them. These are Tips for
> semi-pros:

Too bad you didn't provide a link. I'd love to become a semi-pro through
their tips. :-)

> "If your camera allows *this, you can adjust the light metering
> yourself. Consider beforehand which part of the photograph you want to
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> *LOL, which "semi-pro" shoots with a camera that doesn't allow this?

The ones still relying on old manual equipment? I happen to know one who
still does weddings and portraits with a Rolleiflex DLR.
OTOH, he doesn't really need this advice anymore. :-)

Signature

Regards, Robert                                      http://www.arumes.com

whisky-dave - 28 Apr 2009 13:55 GMT
>> I'm starting to wonder about the IQ (not meaning Image Quality) of Canon
>> shooters or at least how Canon seems to "rate" them. These are Tips for
>> semi-pros:
>
> Too bad you didn't provide a link. I'd love to become a semi-pro through
> their tips. :-)

"The smaller the aperture, the greater the depth of field. Use a larger
aperture for an individual portrait"
I used the above and googled it.  (including the quotes)
not 1000s of suggested links just the one.

http://www.skydweller.co.uk/Camera/PeoplePortraits14_464704.pdf

>> *LOL, which "semi-pro" shoots with a camera that doesn't allow this?
>
> The ones still relying on old manual equipment? I happen to know one who
> still does weddings and portraits with a Rolleiflex DLR.
> OTOH, he doesn't really need this advice anymore. :-)

My[1]  Polaroid land 110B nealry fell of the shelf yesterday.

[1] well I rescued it from it's future in a skip, it can now be stored on a
shelf
until I lose it
Robert Spanjaard - 28 Apr 2009 14:16 GMT
>> Too bad you didn't provide a link. I'd love to become a semi-pro
>> through their tips. :-)
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> http://www.skydweller.co.uk/Camera/PeoplePortraits14_464704.pdf

So, anyone switching off automatic modes is a semi-pro, _if_ you take it
out of its context. It clearly fits the brochure as a whole...

Signature

Regards, Robert                                      http://www.arumes.com

Mr.T - 29 Apr 2009 03:37 GMT
> So, anyone switching off automatic modes is a semi-pro, _if_ you take it
> out of its context. It clearly fits the brochure as a whole...

Nah they consider anyone buying an SLR to be a "semi-pro" even if they only
use auto modes. Anyone who knows how to actually use the controls is
obviously a "pro" :-)

MrT.
Alan Browne - 28 Apr 2009 23:01 GMT
> *LOL, which "semi-pro" shoots with a camera that doesn't allow this?
> Caramba! Even my old crappy Powershot has 3 different light metring modes.
> **I wouldn't have guessed this one....

The definition of a semi-pro can be anyone who sold one photograph
regardless of what went into it.  I know of one guy who got into wedding
photography starting with a high end P&S.  He evolved into doing some
decent work, I just cringe for all of his earlier clients who paid for
his self education...

Signature

-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
--        r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
--      [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
--                   e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

Me - 29 Apr 2009 03:59 GMT
> I know of one guy who got into wedding
> photography starting with a high end P&S.  He evolved into doing some
> decent work, I just cringe for all of his earlier clients who paid for
> his self education...

I cringe for the people who pay large sums of money to have "artistic"
wedding photos done, often printed and bound into large wedding photo
"books" these days, or even worse gross mural sized prints in faux gilt
frames for display somewhere.  I feel a bit the same way about large
(and usually B&W) prints of baby photos.
Few people are worthy of such glorious treatment, including babies.
But if the client is happy, then the pro did his job perfectly,
regardless of cost or equipment used.
spacecadet - 29 Apr 2009 17:30 GMT
>> I know of one guy who got into wedding photography starting with a
>> high end P&S.  He evolved into doing some decent work, I just cringe
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> But if the client is happy, then the pro did his job perfectly,
> regardless of cost or equipment used.
 I venture to suggest that a good part of what you pay a professional
is actually insurance. Or rather assurance that you will definitely have
something decent at the end of the day.
Rich - 29 Apr 2009 01:15 GMT
"Avoid problems with equipment in the field, buy Nikon?"
Dudley Hanks - 29 Apr 2009 01:20 GMT
> "Avoid problems with equipment in the field, buy Nikon?"

Yes, Rich, we aall know you are "out standing in the field" ...  :)

Take Care,
Dudley
D Peter Maus - 29 Apr 2009 03:34 GMT
>   "Avoid problems with equipment in the field, buy Nikon?"

     I'd agree. But then, my D70 was less than a week old when it
locked up on an industrial shoot.

     Had to borrow a friend's rig to complete the job.

     Nikon took care of the issue, upgraded the firmware, and sent it
back pretty quickly, no charge.

     But that Language Development Grant from the Navy came in real
handy that day. :)
Alan Browne - 29 Apr 2009 21:38 GMT
>  "Avoid problems with equipment in the field, buy Nikon?"

Or Minolta.

Or Sony.

Or Canon.

Or Pentax.

Or Olympus.

Or Hasselblad.

Or Leica.

....

Signature

-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
--        r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
--      [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
--                   e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

Morton - 30 Apr 2009 14:47 GMT
> "Avoid problems with equipment in the field, buy Nikon?"

That is why I moved to Canon!

Morton.
.
--------------------------
The Internet will become the
Sacred Sanctuary for Nutters and Idiots.
(Michel Nostradamus, December 14, 1503, July 2, 1566).
--------------------------
whisky-dave - 01 May 2009 11:23 GMT
> "Avoid problems with equipment in the field, buy Nikon?"

I tend to 'stop down' to get a better depth in my field  :)
Robert Coe - 02 May 2009 03:50 GMT
:  "Avoid problems with equipment in the field, buy Nikon?"

Right. I suspect that the last camera you bought was a Kodak Instamatic. But
by all means feel free to prove me wrong.

Bob
Ray Fischer - 02 May 2009 06:09 GMT
>I'm starting to wonder about the IQ (not meaning Image Quality) of Canon
>shooters or at least how Canon seems to "rate" them.

                               _____________________
                   /|  /|     |                     |
                   ||__||     |  Do not feed the    |
                  /   O O\__  | trolls.  Thank you. |
                 /          \ |     --Mgt.          |
                /      \     \|_____________________|
               /   _    \     \      ||
              /    |\____\     \     ||
             /     | | | |\____/     ||
            /       \|_|_|/   |     _||
           /  /  \            |____| ||
          /   |   |           |      --|
          |   |   |           |____  --|
   * _    |  |_|_|_|          |     \-/
*-- _--\ _ \                  |      ||
  /  _     \\        |        /      `
*  /   \_ /- |       |       |
  *      ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________

Signature

Ray Fischer        
rfischer@sonic.net

Filthy Phil - 20 May 2009 21:42 GMT
>  Do not feed the    |
> | trolls.  Thank you. |
>        --Mgt.          |
>        

Who's Margaret?
Jürgen Exner - 20 May 2009 21:49 GMT
>>  Do not feed the    |
>> | trolls.  Thank you. |
>>        --Mgt.          |
>>        
>
>Who's Margaret?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margrethe_II_of_Denmark

That was easy....

jue
John A. - 04 Jul 2009 02:08 GMT
>>>  Do not feed the    |
>>> | trolls.  Thank you. |
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
>That was easy....

Someone should start a "quotes" section on that page. It's an
important quote and aught to be properly attributed.
John A. - 04 Jul 2009 04:20 GMT
>>>>  Do not feed the    |
>>>> | trolls.  Thank you. |
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>Someone should start a "quotes" section on that page. It's an
>important quote and aught to be properly attributed.

(Please pardon the lateness of that reply. It was apparently stuck in
my outbox for a while and somehow just broke through.)
Bob Larter - 23 May 2009 11:41 GMT
>>  Do not feed the    |
>> | trolls.  Thank you. |
>>        --Mgt.          |
>>        
>
> Who's Margaret?

She's a manager. Duh.

Signature

   W
 . | ,. w ,   "Some people are alive only because
  \|/  \|/     it is illegal to kill them."    Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2010 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.