Bit of advice please...

[robert77]

I've done some snapping from the spectator side of the fence at Shelsley Walsh with a 3.2Mp Kodak Easyshare digi cam and got okish results with it's limited spec, but I've just bought a very nice secondhand Canon Eos500 35mm SLR and want to have a bit more of a "proper" go. I'm currently sifting through various sites for a good 200mm lens (Jessops have a nice looking 70-200mm Sigma lens for about £99, unless I find something on fleabay).

But what is confusing me, is what settings to use on the camera. Things like appeture, shutter speed and all that stuff. This is the first "proper" camera I've used. I've just had the prints back from my hols and although I only really used it in "point-and-click" mode, they've come out really nice, but how do I make better use of the feature that the camera has?

[Tim the Grey]

Go to Flickr.

Find pics you like.

There is a tab down on the right, in blue. OTHER camera settings.

See what pictures ring your bell, then try working for that sort of picture.

My son, Minimangler, is trying the limits just now, and is panning down to 1/6th of a second. At 200mm on a D50 or 300mm on a D200. I can't go there. 1/25th is as slow as I get...

I KNOW he threw a thousand pictures away from Silverstone. But the 1,0001st was stunning...
http://flickr.com/photos/jymp/270528...7606369895786/

It really is a learning curve.

My 13 year old has just had an EOS 500 gifted as a birthday present. At least he's got AF and auto. Jake had to make pictures with an OM1, which is all manual, no excuses. He's now got a Nikon kit he hasn't had to buy, of 2 DSLRs and lenses.

Shelsley? We may meet up. We're up around Leamington/Rugby. I have yet to get pix I'm happy with over there...

[minimangler]

Originally Posted by Tim the Grey

Go to Flickr.

Find pics you like.

There is a tab down on the right, in blue. OTHER camera settings.

See what pictures ring your bell, then try working for that sort of picture.

My son, Minimangler, is trying the limits just now, and is panning down to 1/6th of a second. At 200mm on a D50 or 300mm on a D200. I can't go there. 1/25th is as slow as I get...

I KNOW he threw a thousand pictures away from Silverstone. But the 1,0001st was stunning...
http://flickr.com/photos/jymp/270528...7606369895786/

It really is a learning curve.

My 13 year old has just had an EOS 500 gifted as a birthday present. At least he's got AF and auto. Jake had to make pictures with an OM1, which is all manual, no excuses. He's now got a Nikon kit he hasn't had to buy, of 2 DSLRs and lenses.

Shelsley? We may meet up. We're up around Leamington/Rugby. I have yet to get pix I'm happy with over there...

I seem to be getting a rep as a "one trick panning pony

I threw away well over 2000 i think, but I had noone to shoot for and no deadlines, so it didn't matter.

Pushing the boundaries is the best part of all this. When you get sharp at 1/6th and realise that there's is jack all point in it...I'm heading back up the shutter speeds now.

[robert77]

I've just managed to pick up a Vivitar macro focusing zoom lens 72mm 28-200mm 1:3.5-5.3 for about £12 plus postage off Fleabay. Hopefully this will give some good starting results.

[Tim the Grey]

We all have to start somewhere, and those superzooms give a lot of Bang for the Buck!

Just don't be TOO upset if it's not as sharp as the expensive f2.8 kit some around here get to use. But then, they ain't £12...

[GORDON STREETER]

robert77
As its a "film" camera prints are expensive to experiment with unlike digi where you can play about forever at next to nothing cost.
Have a look at a 35mm SLR camera instruction book and try to get the fundamentals of how the shutter speed v lens F stops make "the" exposure.
Basically 1 complete F stop is equal to a complete speed + or -. This is all very well when shooting basic static shots on a standard 50mm lens, but when you start to use long lenses you will see that you have to find a compromise, as the depth of field at the longer end isn't that good and you will probably find (depending on conditions) that you can't use a fast enough speed to get a sharp picture if its stopped down too much. Obviously you can use a faster film until grain becomes unacceptable.

[robert77]

Good point Gordon. I can see where you're coming from with the cost difference between film and digi and I quite agree, but unfortunately, I'm on a buget tighter then a nuns chistity belt as far as buying my equipment is concerned. Not only that, I'm a bit old fashioned and prefer 35 SLRs's to D-SLR's as I still think you get a better picture in many cases. Fortunetly, thanks to modern technology, I can get the film processed into prints and/or onto CD for publication purposes and uploading to the web.

I know I'm not going to "get-it-right" straight away and I'll need some practice. Having read thru the manual for my Canon (which I've managed to download thanks to a fellow Freecycler), I think I'm a step or two closer to getting on the "snapping ladder".

[GORDON STREETER]

Not having any negatives/positives transferred commercially onto a CD/DVD I don't know what the quality is like and obviously the cost.
It would certainly make our old obsolete gear worth a second look !
Has anyone on 10/10Th's had any experience?
My scanner will do this but its just too time consuming !

[robert77]

Well, I had my film processed at Jessops (only to print mind) but they can and will put your 35mm film to CD. Although I'm not sure what the cost is, and like you say, quality/cost may be an issue but it may be worth a look as regards your old/obsolete gear. I'll see what I can find out and post my findings.

[Kelvin]

Some outlet of Boots will also put your images onto CD. For about 12 months before I went digital I would have films processed on a 1 hour service, and put onto CD. My film stock was Kodak 'High Definitation' results were pretty good I thought, and saved me so much time in scanning the prints!.

[minifox]

i may have a canon eos 350d which is a good starter camera if your interested pm me.

[agosling]

Having to work within a budget and using film may well be an advantage, it will force you to think alot harder before you press the shutter, it is very easy with digital to just adopt the spray and pray approach, being more thoughtful about your shooting will be good for you in the long run.

That said however, if you are on as tight a budget as you say you have to remember that ever shot is going to cost you and you are going to get an awful lot of rubbish when your starting out so going out and buying a cheap second hand DSLR might be better value. You can always go back to the film camera when your skills are better.

Just my 2 cents worth

[robert77]

Been a while since I posted on this thread, so here goes.
Having got my second film processed to print and onto CD and looked thru them. I've found the transfer to CD is pretty good, the quality is very good and I was pleased with the results, although I do think I may still invest in a negative scanner at some point over the winter.

agosling, I agree with your point exactly about using film, having got my media passes and a copy of the entry list for Shelsley Walsh this weekend and managed to get hold of a 70-210mm Sigma macro lens (thank you LCE Southampton Civic), I've been able to sit down and try to "select" cars (and bikes) to shoot, (there's a couple of very nice classic racing cars coming that I think are gorgeous, including a Chevron B42 F5000 car).

Tim, will you be at Shelsley This weekend?

[Tim the Grey]

Highly unlikely, sadly. Family commitments.

Although promising the Boss a day out in Worcestershire may just swing the deal. She went to school in Great Malvern, and loves the area...

If I am, I may have Minime, and son number 2, plus a 3 year old ankle biter!

PM, or email me with a phone number? I'll call if we're coming.

Tim

[minifox]

Originally Posted by robert77

Been a while since I posted on this thread, so here goes.
Having got my second film processed to print and onto CD and looked thru them. I've found the transfer to CD is pretty good, the quality is very good and I was pleased with the results, although I do think I may still invest in a negative scanner at some point over the winter.

agosling, I agree with your point exactly about using film, having got my media passes and a copy of the entry list for Shelsley Walsh this weekend and managed to get hold of a 70-210mm Sigma macro lens (thank you LCE Southampton Civic), I've been able to sit down and try to "select" cars (and bikes) to shoot, (there's a couple of very nice classic racing cars coming that I think are gorgeous, including a Chevron B42 F5000 car).

Tim, will you be at Shelsley This weekend?

at this early stage in the game whilst ur still learning i reccomend taking pictures of anything and everything that drives/rides past you.
practice makes perfect and all that!

[minimangler]

Originally Posted by minifox

at this early stage in the game whilst ur still learning i reccomend taking pictures of anything and everything that drives/rides past you.
practice makes perfect and all that!

Top advice. Sit on a main road if need's be!

Just be careful what you take photos of, some people don't like it.

[minifox]

Originally Posted by minimangler

Top advice. Sit on a main road if need's be!

Just be careful what you take photos of, some people don't like it.

next doors 18year old daughter isnt fond of her picture taken

[MikeHoyer]

She'd probably be ok if you removed that camera from the shower.

[minimangler]

Originally Posted by MikeHoyer

She'd probably be ok if you removed that camera from the shower.

hahahahaha!

[robert77]

Constructive critique welcomed. Took these (just a small selection) and many more shots at Shelsley Walsh last weekend. Aided by a little advice from a few of the regulars. To see all the photo's from last weekend, PM me for the URL of my website.