• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

to DSLR or not? that is the question

You would also need an adapter. The SRL lenses are smaller on the camera end than the DSLR. Most say that autofocus will not work.

If the lens isn't autofocus to begin with - I have a 500mm mirror lens that I play with. Needed an adaptor for the 20D, but the lens wasn't autofocus, so it's usable.

Some Nikons will use both. The older Pentaxes would use both.
 
zuben el genub said:
Some Nikons will use both. The older Pentaxes would use both.
Click to expand...

Truth on the Pentax. Parents had an old Pentax from the 80's and I bought one of the Pentax DSLRs to try out when they came out about 5 years ago. Their 50mm prime worked perfectly with the new DSLR.
 
These are the lenses (from my film camera) that I was asking about if they'd work with a digital EOS. I use to love this camera!

IMAG0043.jpg


IMAG0044.jpg
 
She just opened today and I can't figure how to take a picture but have the background blurry. I need a class. Anyone have good websites?
 
JayC said:
She just opened today and I can't figure how to take a picture but have the background blurry. I need a class. Anyone have good websites?
Click to expand...

What you are talking about is bokeh. Depth of field creates this through use of a wide open aperture. Put the camera in aperture priority mode (Av) and open the aperture up as wide as the lens will let you (probably 3.5 if you're using a kit lens with it fully zoomed out) and get as close to the subject as you can and still get it in the frame and be able to focus. Opening up the aperture makes the depth of field shallower the wider you open it.

This is why I suggest buying the Canon 50mm f/1.8 for $100. f/1.8 allows you to shoot in much lower lighting conditions as well as gives you a nice introduction to shooting with shallow depths of field. Hard to accomplish with the kit lens because the aperture simply doesn't open up enough.

Just in case you don't know (I assumed you did) the lower the aperture number, the more open the aperture is or is capable of opening.
 
svt_gEEk said:
Just in case you don't know (I assumed you did) the lower the aperture number, the more open the aperture is or is capable of opening.
Click to expand...

I don't know anything about aperture. I'm more of a point and shoot person. I did put the camera in Creative Auto shooting and moved the on screen dial to blurring. With that being said I was inside the house taking a picture of my daughter and the background wasn't blurry. I'm assuming because one, the background was to close and two, the flash came on which in the book states if flash used the setting will not be applied.
 
JayC said:
I don't know anything about aperture. I'm more of a point and shoot person. I did put the camera in Creative Auto shooting and moved the on screen dial to blurring. With that being said I was inside the house taking a picture of my daughter and the background wasn't blurry. I'm assuming because one, the background was to close and two, the flash came on which in the book states if flash used the setting will not be applied.
Click to expand...

Yeah, don't use that mode, haha. Dive in and start experimenting with aperture priority(Av), shutter priority(Tv), and manual modes(M). You get much more control over the camera and will be able to accomplish the results you want. A flash won't hinder you from getting a background blur if you get a wide open aperture. You might have some harsh lighting, but you can still get the blur. Now, in low light, you still might not be able to get enough shutter speed even with the aperture wide open. You can help that by bumping the ISO up, but you really won't be very happy above 1600, the picture starts getting very grainy and loses a lot of detail. I try to shoot 800 or below, but sometimes you just have to go up higher.
 
Here's a few that I took yesterday. The first one was when i was trying to get the background blurry and the second one was on fully automatic shooting. As you can see automatic mode made the background blurry.

IMG_0032.jpg


IMG_0001-1.jpg
 
Notice you were also much closer to the subject in the second picture than in the first. That makes a huge difference.

There has to be a big difference in the distance to your subject and the difference to the surroundings in order to blur with larger aperture numbers (more closed). That's why I said you need a wide open aperture to accomplish what you want to do.
 
svt_gEEk said:
Notice you were also much closer to the subject in the second picture than in the first. That makes a huge difference.

There has to be a big difference in the distance to your subject and the difference to the surroundings in order to blur with larger aperture numbers (more closed). That's why I said you need a wide open aperture to accomplish what you want to do.
Click to expand...


ill definitely play around with it. I feel like I bought the camera for me rather then my wife. Oh well!
 
JayC said:
ill definitely play around with it. I feel like I bought the camera for me rather then my wife. Oh well!
Click to expand...

Haha, both of you will have fun with it. I'm a techie so I enjoy the technical side of it and know all the ins and outs of how to set it up for any particular shot. My wife is more the creative side and just wants it to work when she takes a picture. So I tell her what settings to use in certain conditions and what not and she takes care of the creativity. I do enjoy shooting, but her shots are much better than mine when she gets the settings right. If you ever have any questions or just looking for some tips, shoot me a PM :) I'm no expert or professional, but I've been playing with DSLRs for almost 10 years now.
 
Hadron said:
How I handled the Nikon vs Canon thing was very simple. Both made good bodies, both had a range of suitable lenses, so I left it to handling. Played with entry level bodies from both (what I'd be buying) and higher end (as I might want to step up later, though by then they'd be different models). What I found was that I was comfortable with all of the Nikons I tried, less so with most Canons (grips were either too small or too large for me), so on that basis it seemed that Nikon probably suited me better. My brother came to the opposite conclusion. As with many things, there's no "right" answer, just the one that you are happiest with.

All my point and shoot cameras are Canon, as it happens, so no fanboyism here ;)
Click to expand...


I didn't even know there was fanboyism. My Dad is a great photographer (Hobbiest) who had photographs published in books. He always seemed to have a lot of time for Nikon. I've always liked the thought of Nikon over Canon. In truth, I can't help think of photocopiers when I think of Canon.

So when My Dad leant me his spare D60 which was stolen when I was burgled, he let me keep the insurance money so it was only right to spend it on a Nikon.

I got a D5000, which is not particularly a great spec or anything, but its far more superior than what I can do with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom