DSLRUsers.com

Posted: **Fri Mar 27, 2009 6:53 am**

I've only had my D40 a week, and so the learning curve is little short of exponential. Whilst I'm reading as much as my eyes and feeble mind can accommodate without spontaneous combustion, I'm also taking shots and fiddling with aperture and whatnot as much as possible too to simply experience what happens.

Here are some of my first ones, would love any and all comments, especially negative things to fix and/or points to watch out for I guess! Can dig out what settings I had for these if anyone wants them - I've tried so many different things the last few days I wouldn't have a clue off the top of my head...!

Bridge:
Took variants on this at different angles, but whilst the edge leading up dead centre like that is very stark I liked that it lead into the willow as the green too is a nice offset to the orangey tones of the river and concrete. I've other shots with the edge on an angle that are easier to look at but this cut of the jagged old joists of the bridge and I liked those and their harshness against the soft willow.

Dandelions:
Just shooting close up and handheld, though I swear once I get my paws upon a macro lens I'll probably never see sky in my shots again! My first go at close-up with the D40, just using ye olde generic macro setting. Was focusing upon the middle poufball.

Harvey:
Animal only sits still for me with a bone in his face! Was careful to focus upon his eyes and not that big ol' nose (or half-masticated bone). I like that the background and even his ears are unfocused but that most of his face is clear.

Indi:
Yep, I'm one of those sorts who takes far too many shots of her animals! This one I tried using the healing brush in Photoshop with.. Indi had eye bogies either side and has a large scar upon the front of her left knee in the background there, just below where those white flecks are. Have only had Ps a week too (just oldie CS version) so it's something else I'm learning my way around.

Thanks!
Franks

Posted: **Fri Mar 27, 2009 7:20 am**

#1 I like. And thank you for pointing out WHY I like it. It helps my photography.
#2 I would have preferred more depth of field to include the second flower. An off camera flash works wonders here for providing enough light to stop down further. Also search for Andrew's (ATJ) posts on home made softboxes. They are easy to make and improve the lighting enormously. Put an SB800 or SB900 on your shopping list
#3 I like
#4. I find the dog's pose awkward, and again would prefer a greater depth of field.

Are you using one of the Automagic settings on the camera? If so, you are generally better off with Aperture (in this case)or Shutter priority (for moving subjects) or Manual (anything when you have the time to compose, but especially macros)

Posted: **Fri Mar 27, 2009 7:51 am**

Hi Greg, thanks for your comments!

I mostly use aperture setting as I'm really trying to get used to changing dof - the close-up is pretty much the only shot I've taken on a pre-programmed setting so far. Looking at the info for the pic the camera took it at f/7.1 and 1/60 - so maybe going up another f-stop or two would have included the rest of the flower heads? I'm popping into work this morning to drop off the truck so might nip out back and grab another shot of that plant with just changing the aperture myself and not using the macro setting.

I have the SB400 or SB600 on my shopping list, but the more expensive ones might be out of my reach for awhile - I'm still at that awkward stage of wanting a billion new things all at once, but having to choose between new lenses or flashes/bags/filters, etc.! I do like the idea of making my own accessories though, I take it a softbox is a kind of light reflector? Thanks for the tip, I'll do a search and see what I can come up with.

I see what you mean about the pose - she does look awkward, and it makes me feel awkward now looking at it. She lays down like that a lot so perhaps to me it didn't seem an unusual pose for her at the time, and I liked the alertness in her expression. With dof do you think her whole body should be in focus? I was trying to capture expression and her face mostly, and this was done at f/4.8, whereas the other dog was f/5.6. It's interesting working out what the dof should be for different kinds of shots - coming from a compact it's fun just having different apertures to play with and novel being able to get part of the shot clear whilst leaving the rest out of range, but perhaps simply having the shorter dof doesn't mean I should leave apertures wide for every shot just because I can, haha!

Glad you like the first one - I've only ever had a compact so I guess I'm used to thinking about composition as much as possible since it's all I could change as I've never had these other functions to play with before! Looking at it now though it still seems messy somehow, and I think it's because the background has nothing inparticular to look at on the left. Also I think I should have had more sky to balance all that yellow, and perhaps have put a slight blue (?) filter on to make the green and blue stand out as greater contrast against the yellow tones.. it's all yellow-tinged, even the trees. Hmm..

Posted: **Fri Mar 27, 2009 10:28 am**

If you can only afford he SB400 or 600, go with the 600. The 400 is really just a larger pop up flash, and has severe limitations for what you are trying to do. I said the 800 or 900 as I originally bought the 600, and very soon after bought the 800 because of its limitations. Later I bought another 800 and eventually replaced the 600 with a 900. So I now have 2x800 and 1x 900. This works for nearly everything I want to light Since I have them, it is amazing how often I use more than one flash, though I admit I didn't miss them when I only had one. :roll:

Your yellow cast in the first one could be White Balance. If you took RAW (NEF) rather than JPG, it is easily corrected.
Just change it in your software. CaptureNX2 is easiest, but you can do it in ViewNX ( free to download) or in Photoshop as well. Again, unless you have changed it your camera is probably set on AWB (AutoWhite Balance) You will achieve much better and consistent results if you match the setting to the scene. In this case full sun would have been best. I always shoot RAW, and leave the camera WB set on Shade as this is the setting I need most often. If it is not right, I use Capture to change it after the event

DOF is an interesting issue, and very much a personal choice. But it does get tighter on Macro shots. I have the 105 f2.8 MicroNikkor and the fStops go all the way down to f57. Incidentally, Extension Tubes (the Kenko ones are great!) are a cheap way to get closer to your subject. They work best on Prime lenses (these are usually cheap too - 50mm f1.8 is about AUD200) but will work on any lens, your zoom and even your macro when you get it.

Posted: **Sat Mar 28, 2009 6:20 pm**

Ahhh, white balance, of course! I think I had it set to cloudy and must remember to check WB beforehand next time... as well as everything else I have to learn to check now I have a proper camera, haha! I was shooting in jpg but have changed now to RAW. I have Photoshop and also got ViewNX with the camera so will have a playaround with my next shots and fiddle WB in those programs.

I have seen extension tubes on ebay and was wondering how useful they'd be.. since I have so much stuff I need to save for it could be a cheaper way to get closer until I can afford more lenses! A 50mm prime is definitely on the wishlist, though I'm not sure if the lack of autofocus on the 1.8 would bother me. Have been practising manually focusing and haven't done too badly, so perhaps I might go alright with it and could save a few hundreds on the new 50mm 1.4 that will focus with my D40.

Will research more on these flashes as I know the 800 has some clever features that interact with the camera depending upon aperture and whatnot, but need to check if they'd work with my D40 as I suspect they might be for more sophisticated bodies. I thought the SB600 would be alright for me as I can angle it upwards and sideways to bounce the flash or change direction, and it's only a little over 1/3 the 800's price, but all the same I'd rather not get something I'll find limiting and will need to upgrade once I get better at photography. I found this review on Amazon by Gadgester that outlines his thoughts on the differences:

I won't repeat the wealth of information the other kind reviewers have already given. I'll just focus on why I decided to cough up the extra $100 to get the SB-800 instead of the less powerful SB-600.

Compared to the SB-600, the SB-800 has the following extra features:

1) Much more powerful, as reflected in the GN.
2) Slightly faster recycle time with the standard four AA batteries. It also comes with a battery holder that holds a fifth battery which cuts down recycle time by 1/3 to 1/2.
3) The SB-800 has non-TTL auto and auto aperture modes. (More on this later.)
4) In wireless remote mode, the SB-800 can act both as the master and slave, whereas the 600 can only be a slave.
5) It comes with a useful diffusion dome, which won't even fit on the SB-600.
6) The SB-800 package also includes two colored gel filters.
7) The SB-800 can do repeating flash (in the same exposure), for a strobe effect.

Basically, both the 600 and 800 support Nikon's latest flash technologies, i-TTL (supported by the D70 and D2H only) and CLS (creative lighting system), in addition to all the TTL (through the lens) flash modes Nikon introduced in the past. The 600 is really a prosumer-level flash that's either TTL or manual, whereas the 800 is pure pro-grade with a lot of modes and options. The manual, evidently written by a Japanese manual writer, attests to its sophistication; understanding the manual will really require a Ph.D. in yoga so you don't stress yourself out.

The 800's auto modes are what won me over in the end. The auto modes can set the flash output automatically on Nikon bodies that do not support any TTL (through the lens) mode. On those bodies, with the 600 you'd have to resort to manual, which is simply a pain in the butt, not to mention prone to error. The two non-TTL auto modes on the 800 are auto aperture and auto. You'll need to study the manual very carefully to figure out the difference; I still haven't, but I'm already enjoying the auto aperture mode. The availability of auto modes also means the 800 can be used on a wide range of Nikon bodies than the simpler 600.

If you are deciding between the 600 and the 800 like I was, ask yourself the following questions:

1) Do you have an extra $100-$150 to spend? If yes, the 800.
2) Do you plan to use the external flash a lot? If yes, the 800.
3) Do you have Nikon bodies (usually older manual ones) that do not support TTL (you can find out in the camera's user's guide)? If yes, the 800.
4) Do you plan to do a lot of wireless flash photography and take full advantage of Nikon's Creative Lighting System? If yes, the 800.
5) If you want to get a diffusion dome that fits the flash, get the 800.

In the end, I think the SB-800 is a better long-term investment than the SB-600, despite the higher price. It's much more powerful and flexible, and even though it's an overkill for me right now, I imagine when my flash photography improves (and I'm trying very hard right now), it'll prove a very worthy investment.

DSLRUsers.com

Humble beginnings..

Humble beginnings..

Re: Humble beginnings..

Re: Humble beginnings..

Re: Humble beginnings..

Re: Humble beginnings..