Canon EOS Rebel 300D

Cindy Procious · 02-01-2005, 12:53 PM

Oh Kim - thanks so much. Being the parent of a troubled teen right now, I am always in need of a good laugh, and you SO helped me this morning. (I wasn't laughing AT you - more like WITH you - because i've been there, right where you are, when i got my Rebel.)

For those who don't have a Rebel, here are the little symbols to which Kim is referring. (Kim - this book came with my camera - did you not get one of these?)

Anyway - I learned a lot from this thread about ISO. My last photo shoot yielded ghost images in my sitter's eyeballs - double-vision - even with the tripod - I was shooting at an ISO of 100. Now I know that was the problem! Thanks, Mike!

Kim - this is page 51 in the manual.

Cindy Procious · 02-01-2005, 12:55 PM

For ISO (page 50).

Kimberly Dow · 02-01-2005, 01:48 PM

Cindy -

Thanks for posting this. Glad to be useful this am.

Yes I got the **(*^!! book. It is helpful, but not if you dont understand what ISO means in the first place. I had bought another book just about the Rebel at Barnes & Noble and was working my way through that. I need to now go back and read the original manual now.

Here is the thing - if you are not experienced with this and someone starts talking 'shutter speed' - there is no way to understand. How the heck would I know what the shutter speed should be? Just the other day I took a photo in low-light and it took forever to click. It was an 'a-ha' moment for me. So THIS is when I need to speed up the shutter.

I've been saying for years that I need a class in basic photography. This forum may be quicker and more useful though.

Mike McCarty · 02-01-2005, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Just the other day I took a photo in low-light and it took forever to click. It was an 'a-ha' moment for me

That should have been an "a-ha" moment. A tenth of a second is an eternity for the aperture to be open. Much movement can take place in this amount of time.

For hand held operation an experienced photographer on solid footing without any wind can manage as low as 1/30 of a second. Not something you want to strive for. You might shoot for 1/60 as a minimum. For tripod use this would not be a problem. That takes care of your end of the camera.

For the other end of the camera -- an adult can hold steady enough for 1/30 but again, it's not something to strive for. Children are a whole other smoke. I would want to be 1/100 of a second and 1/200 would be better for the little ones.

Remember, additional speed does not add any quality to your image. It only allows you to stop the action, subtle as it may be. In fact, if you are using ISO to gain SS you are arguably loosing quality as you go farther up the speed ladder.

I have on my Nikon a feature called "Auto ISO" which allows me to set a minimum shutter speed (say 1/60). If the available light is such that the SS drops below this number it will automatically bump up the ISO until the SS gets to my target minimum. Pretty handy, I don't know if your camera has this. If it does I would recommend you use it. I am so used to managing this manually from my film days I have a hard time letting go.

Kimberly Dow · 02-01-2005, 03:20 PM

Another stupid question Mike -

When you say 1/30 of a second - that would be an ISO of 30? So when you say 1/200 for kids that would be the 200 ISO setting - correct?

That scares me since in those Barbie shots I didn't get anything decent under 800. And she wasn't moving. Maybe too much coffee.

Mike McCarty · 02-01-2005, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kimberly Dow

Another stupid question Mike -

When you say 1/30 of a second - that would be an ISO of 30? So when you say 1/200 for kids that would be the 200 ISO setting - correct?

That scares me since in those Barbie shots I didn't get anything decent under 800. And she wasn't moving. Maybe too much coffee.

No my dear. Shutter speed (1/30 th of a second) is totally separate from the ISO number. You can influence SS by changing the ISO, but you cannot influence ISO by changing the SS.

ISO's will range from 100 to 1600 on your camera. Remember when you bought a roll of film? You had several choices of what was called "film speed." That was actually the ISO setting. The ISO definition gets slightly convoluted when going from film to digital, but you could think of it as film speed.

Try this -- without actually taking a picture, set your ISO to 100 and find something specific to point at. Notice the exposure in the viewfinder. You will see two numbers -- the SS and the aperture. It might read: 1/125 ... 5.6. Make note of the one on the left, this is the SS.

Now change the ISO to 400 and point at precisely the same spot. Notice that the SS has increased by a pretty good margin. This is the number you want to monitor. You want to get this number into the 1/125 range with the minimum increase of ISO. At this kind of SS you can stop the movement of most folks in pose. It might not freeze a person running the 100 dash, but that's another story. It's amazing that the SS can go all the way to 1/8000 th of a second. This sort of speed can almost stop a speeding bullet.

Elizabeth Schott · 02-01-2005, 03:54 PM

Quote:

No my dear. Shutter speed (1/30 th of a second) is totally separate from the ISO number. You can influence SS by changing the ISO, but you cannot influence ISO by changing the SS.

See Mike I am not the only blond here!

Maybe Kim wants to know what the 1/30 is by the number that shows up on the shutter speed info. There are numbers like -3 or 3.

If I knew this was going to last forever I would have posted new art work. But thanks for all your help. Now you have to add a Rebel to your bag!

Mary Sparrow · 02-01-2005, 05:57 PM

So as not to bore you with more test pictures. I just did the same thing Kim did with another still doll model.

I tried out every manual white balance setting on the thing with an ISO of 800, and got nice clear pictures, with obvious differences in color. Then I put it on the automatic setting that just cuts the flash off. Doing that got me the most accurate color, but the face was blurry on the doll. (This was what I was doing the other day with Marc). The next best color was putting it in P mode but automatic WB..they were very close, but the face was clear.

So I suppose, for now, until I really learn this, in order to avoid the blur, I am better off putting it in P mode to avoid the blur and pick the white balance Icon that best fits the situation...which seems like the auto WB was doing the trick. I guess this computerized camera is smarter than me..Whoda thunk it.

Mike McCarty · 02-01-2005, 06:36 PM

Mary,

Be careful how your focusing is set up. Notice on the picture of the race car above that you have multiple possible focus points. This is something that you select on your menu.

With my camera I can choose to have the camera focus on the closest object to the camera (I don't like this method), or have it focus on the center of the viewfinder (I prefer this).

Make sure you are focusing on the face and not the closer knees of the subject, or not focusing on the back of the chair.

I find that when I am trying to learn some aspect of my camera that I concentrate on one feature at a time. It gets too complex when you start mixing different variables into one experiment.

Elizabeth Schott · 02-01-2005, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mary Smith

So as not to bore you with more test pictures. I just did the same thing Kim did with another still doll model.

I tried out every manual white balance setting on the thing with an ISO of 800, and got nice clear pictures, with obvious differences in color. Then I put it on the automatic setting that just cuts the flash off. Doing that got me the most accurate color, but the face was blurry on the doll. (This was what I was doing the other day with Marc). The next best color was putting it in P mode but automatic WB..they were very close, but the face was clear.

So I suppose, for now, until I really learn this, in order to avoid the blur, I am better off putting it in P mode to avoid the blur and pick the white balance Icon that best fits the situation...which seems like the auto WB was doing the trick. I guess this computerized camera is smarter than me..Whoda thunk it.

Mary you can just shoot in the RAW instead of JPEG format, then you set your temperature to what ever you want. So put it in "auto" white balance.