"Advanced" Digital SLR Questions for Shooting MX

B

biglou

A little background: I'm shooting a Canon Digital Rebel SLR, the 6megapixel version, that I bought last year, with a Canon 28-90mm f4.5 lens with a UV and a polarizing filter. I'm looking to get killer MX action shots-as killer as possible given the equipment. It's my understanding that the glass (lens) is the biggest part of picture quality for shooting at my level. To that end, I've been doing a bunch of reading online today, and have a few questions for those with the knowledge:

1. Depth of Field: Am I correct that a larger aperture will produce a shallower depth of field? Meaning, the subject in the photo is in focus, and the background is blurred? How does the shutter speed affect DoF for a given aperture setting? i.e.: Faster shutter speed = shallower Dof, etc.?

2. Lenses: I'm looking at several 70-200mm f2.8 lenses. Other than those obvious specs, what else should I be looking for? Does the diameter of the lens play any part in its picture quality, DoF, etc., if the length ranges are the same? There's the Sigma brand for ~$750, and a Vivitar Series 1 brand for less than $300 at Wal-Mart. Both 70-200mm f2.8. What else should I consider when choosing a lens?

Links to two lenses I'm looking at:

Sigma Lens
Vivitar Lens

3. My Digital Rebel has several "auto" modes. Would not using a manual mode, such as to set the largest aperture setting, be better? Seems like at the largest aperture, the shutter speed would be the fastest (best for shooting MX). I can select aperture or shutter speed priority, or full manual. Chili says the AI autofocus is paramount for shooting action like MX. Thoughts?

4. I also have a "portrait" auto mode which says it produces a shallow depth of field. When a buddy shot pics of us at a race last year, we were blurred. Is the shutter speed simply too slow in this setting?

5. Lens Filters: Do the UV and Polarizer filters distort the image appreciably? Does using both simultaneously cause any problems?

6. Lens Hoods: They look cool, but what do they do? Do the affect lens filters in any way, good or bad?

7. Known limitations of the Rebel: The only way to get the AI Servo focus is to use the automatic "action" mode (running guy icon on the selector dial). This mode is key for stopping the action, but eliminates the ability to set the aperture manually. Additionally, the autofocus has 7 focus points, which can be picked, down to a single one, but it is only for one shot. This kills shooting in "burst mode", where I pull the best shot(s) out of the burst of 4. I wonder how effectively and consistently one could shoot in full manual, selecting the largest aperture, and adjusting the shutter speed to adequately stop the action?

8. So if I get a 200mm lens, will that in itself guarantee me a shallower depth of field, especially given the fact that using the "action" mode will automatically set both aperture and shutter speed? I'm guessing some experimentation in full manual might get me where I need to be.

9. Last one, ISO: What effect does ISO have on aperture and shutter speed? In full manual mode, I have control over this setting. Any suggestions on setting this manually for daylight actions shots like MX?


OK, that's all I got for now! Big thanks to anyone that can offer up any advice!


For review, some large images from Red Bud using the equipment listed at the top of the page. "Not bad considering the glass you were using" Chili says! :)

pic1
pic2
pic3
pic4
pic5
pic6
pic7
pic8
pic9
pic10
pic11
pic12
pic13

I'm thinking of how awesome some of these would have been if I'd had a longer lens...
 

ellandoh

dismount art student
~SPONSOR~
Mi. Trail Riders
Aug 29, 2004
2,958
0
how do those pros keep from getting armpump..............every picture in there they have a finger on the clutch. i notice rc likes the middle one :laugh:
chad probably lost 1/100000th of a second kicking all that dirt, his form looks much like mine after a hard day :bang:

ps those pics are sweeeeet. doesnt look to me like you need help. they look as pro as any pics ive ever noticed
 

YZ165

YZabian
May 4, 2004
2,431
0
Well said ellandoh. Those are some great pics Lou!
 
B

biglou

I appreciate the kind words, and I'll agree, they are pretty cool and I am pleased with them. But, they could be sooooo much better, trust me! And the pros look at things with a much more critical eye, too. Also, I need a longer lens, and am looking for the technical info and tips to help me purchase the correct equipment and use it to its full potential.
 

plykins

~SPONSOR~
Apr 6, 2002
166
0
Ok Lou, here we go:
1 Depth of field is dependant on exposure time. The larger aperture produces a smaller depth of field because the exposure time is less.As far as the the shutter speed at a given aperture, the slower speed will produce a larger depth of field, but the picture will be under exposed. When one is changed, the other must also change to get the right exposure.
2 Lenses are rated on several things: glass quality, smoothness and speed of focus, and aperture size. I have both Sigma and Vivitar. Picture quality is about the same(a professional photographer could tell the difference).
3 Shooting action pictures like MX you will need a faster shutter speed,although the faster the shutter speed the smaller the depth of field. I would use the auto exposure feature and adjust the apeture keeping the exposure time at 1/60 or faster. Keeping the exposure arround 1/60 will give you the largest depth of field possible.
4 Aperture was too large, making the exposure too fast.
5 No and no
6 They can keep stray light from entering the camera, especially when the sun is in front of you.
7 & 8 I would again suggest the auto exposure and adjusting the aperture to keep the speed 1/60 or faster.
9 ISO is going to have an effect on the pictures. In film photography(what all my experience is in) the larger the ISO number the faster your shutter speed will be, but the quality of the pics will be less.
To take a good picture you need to have the shutter speed and aperture at the correct position. Changing one will affect the other. By changing these you affect the depth of field(slower shutter speed-larger depth of field). Once you learn to do this, then it is a matter of what you want to achieve in the photo.
Hope this helps.
 

a454elk

Mexicutioner
LIFETIME SPONSOR
Jun 5, 2001
7,538
18
Lou, I learned alot after buying the Canon 20D. JPIVEY is a wealth of information and I also bought this book which is great. It's called "Understanding Exposure Revised Edition " by Bryan Peterson.

Got it through Amazon.

I learned how to shoot full manual as well as partial by working the shutter speeds, ISO, and aperature. The higher the ISO, the lower lighting you can shoot in. The higher the aperature, the more you'll see the background and the lower the aperature, the more blur.

Lou, trust me, that book lays it all out for us that are less schooled. I guarantee you that you will fully understand all settings after reading that book. Enjoy!
Elk
 
B

biglou

Thanks Plykins. :cool: I was especially interested in ISO for digital photography. I've done some film photography, but on a serious ameteur level. I was curious as to whether or not the ISO setting would affect the pic quality in the digital world.

Elk, I'll order that book right away. And yeah, I was hoping to hear from jpivey too! :)

Thanks fellas. :cool:
 

plykins

~SPONSOR~
Apr 6, 2002
166
0
Lou,
As in film photography I would imagine ISO is especially important if you are going to enlarge the photos. The larger the ISO the grainer the enlargements will be. Thus the smaller the ISO the better the quality but the shutter speed will be quicker making the depth of field smaller. In film photography the old,old manual lenses had the depth of field on the lense. If you want to learn, practice strictly with the manual mode.
 

a454elk

Mexicutioner
LIFETIME SPONSOR
Jun 5, 2001
7,538
18
The iso on the digital camera can make a difference as well. A high iso will have a higher degee of noise, depending on the quality of your camera. The 20D I have has a very low noise level on an iso of 1600. I only use a high iso for darker shots indoors. Like plyk said, the higher the iso, the faster you can set the shutter speed. Do what he said, and what that book told me, use full manual settings to get used to what changes. The light meter built in helps you adjust the settings to get the right exposue. They call it the triangle something; shutter speed, aperature and iso. What I did to help was buy a kickass lens from Canon. It's the 75-300 image stabalizer one. It zooms great and then helps steady the shot. Works wonders on indoor slow shutter speeds. I've also learned to shoot indoors with no flash!
 

Tony Eeds

Godspeed Tony.
N. Texas SP
Jun 9, 2002
9,535
0
Lou:

First thinks first ... good job and you have balls for tossing them out for others to critique. I haven't as yet.

My take ... and I look forward to JPIVEY's comments as well.

1. Depth of Field: Yes the larger the aperture (smaller number) the less the depth of field. F64 was the name of a group of photographers in the 30's headed up by Ansel Adams. The depth of field was (and remains) phenomenal in their work. They had little or no movement in their photos though, so shutter time was not an issue. Aperture and shutter speed work in reverse tandem as plykins mentioned.

2. Lens: Glass is the most important “quality” element of a lens. Fixed lens generally have far better optics than zoom or adjustable length lens as it is easier to design a fixed lens system to compensate for aberrations in the lens elements. Zoom lens are a compromise at best and are designed to provide acceptable quality throughout the entire zoom range, but are often balanced for the middle point of the zoom range. In the case of your 70~200 that would be around 130 mm or so. Price is not always an indicator of quality, but in the case of lens I would have to say that it is. Cheaper lens make more compromises than higher priced lens. Prime lens (those by the camera manufacturer) are often many times more expensive than after market lens like Sigma and Vivitar. Not to say after market quality isn’t good, because it can be. With the advent of the computer many of the after market lens gained significantly on prime lens. I admit to not knowing a great deal about either of these specific lens. The other factor affecting lens quality is the speed or F stop of the lens. The lower the F stop, the greater the light gathering ability, but with that ability comes increased aberrations because the centerpoint of the lens is the optimal focus point and images degrade as they use larger percentages of the optics. As you mentioned though, lower F stops allow for slower shutter speeds though, which can help in many situations.

3. Auto vs. Manual: Simply stated, you have significantly more control in manual mode than you do in auto modes as the computer is mapped (if you will) to produce certain results and they are always going to be based upon compromises.

4. I have used the Portrait mode very little, although I will get VERY familiar at an upcoming wedding ...

5. Filters: Yes, two filters will affect the photo quality more than one filter, but the UV is the first thing I put on a lens when I purchase it and I never remove it as it protects the outer coating. I would never swap them and have never been disappointed by having both except on extreme wide angle lens where the filters clip the corners of the photo area.

6. Lens Hoods: They can be beneficial when shooting towards the sun. The shorter the lens (in mm) the larger the angle of conflict (does that make sense?). Wide angles are far more problematic than telephotos. If you can get the lens to be in a shadow (tree, human, hat ... whatever) it serves the same function as a hood.

7. Many old time film cameras suffered the issue of not being able to have a burst mode. Knowing when to take the “single best shot” is still the best method, although burst mode has helped greatly in capturing the moment. Full manual makes anticipation of the action paramount.

8. Lens Length: The 200 mm you mention will give you a more shallow depth of field than a smaller mm lens. That being said, I shot the Big Bend Open Road Race with my 300 mm and 50~60% of my shots were in perfect focus because I picked a spot on the track and set the focus and took the shot when the car hit that spot. Mind you the cars were approaching me at anywhere from 100 to 150 miles per hour. In this case I allowed the camera to pick the optimal shutter speed / aperture combination for the lighting level as there were clouds streaming over all day taking us from full sun to full shade and back almost at the snap of the finger.

9. IOS ... aka ASA to us old farts: The lower the number the tighter the grain when talking about film. In the case of digital photography this still somewhat applies. The lower the number the less the noise in the photo file. By this I mean things that will show up when a photo is blown up to the upper reaches of it potential size. File sizes have theoretical maximum sizes that can be acceptably printed without the majority of people finding the result objectionable. Is that clear as mud? For example a large fine shot at 200 ISO will have less noise than the same shot if you use 1600 ISO. Noise is the dots, fuzziness, etc. that you see when you print a shot. Your camera manual has the theoretical maximum sizes for the various photo settings that correlates with your megapixel range.

One thing you have not mentioned is RAW instead of JPEG format. Does the Rebel allow you to shoot RAW photos? If so, you will be able to do much more in Photoshop if you use RAW format. Now mind you, it will not make up for out of focus or percent of overall image issues, but you might consider that, if the Rebel will make the files.
 
B

biglou

Tony-All makes perfect sense to me. And yes, I can shoot Raw format. I've just never played around with it yet. Another variable for shooting manual, are the "Parameters" settings on the camera. There is an "RGB" selection for "those who will manipulate their photos in Adobe PhotoShop", so I have that selected. Also, sharpness, contrast, etc. So much to learn...

I need to read some more. I'm getting great ideas and appreciate all the input. I think the meter in the view finder should show exposure level when setting up manually, that would be a plus if I can figure out how to read it!
 

Tony Eeds

Godspeed Tony.
N. Texas SP
Jun 9, 2002
9,535
0
biglou said:
I think the meter in the view finder should show exposure level when setting up manually, that would be a plus if I can figure out how to read it!

If it is like my D30, it is a bullseye and a line that you match up. I haven't got that far with my 20D.

The actual aperature is shown on the info screen, if you care to check. I never bother to even look if the results are there. If you shoot full manual, I would suggest setting a shutter speed that allows you to get the level of movement in your action that you want and adjust the aperature as required to achieve a correct exposure.

A good book that is more focused towards film and nature, but does a good job descibing the nature and challenges of outdoor photography is Nature Photographer's Complete Guide to Professional Field Techniques by John Shaw. He does a good job of covering action shots. The book predates digital photography, but the fundamentals remain the same.

Speaking of film, my first photography teacher told me to expect to get MAYBE 1 good shot per roll of film at first and that pros rarely expect to get more than a handful out of a roll of film. Perhaps you are asking too much at this point, not that you should not continue to challenge yourself.

The photos you posted are quite nice and do a very good job of capturing the moment.
 
B

biglou

Absolutely, that is the great thing about digital. Shoot, shoot, shoot, delete, delete, delete! I think I shot upwards of 450 shots last weekend, and those are among my best from those.

I think I am "right there" for what I want to accomplish. I'm not looking to turn pro or anything, but I still want to say "wow!" when I shoot. The pic of RC coming at the camera where he's leaning off to the left and on the gas, "pic4", how good would that shot be with a "reach out and touch someone" zoom and a shallower depth of field?

I will say, "Pic13" is the money shot of the weekend due to its focus, clarity and unintentional shallow DoF thanks to panning.

I like your statements on the fixed lenses, but this would be impractical for me as I don't have multiple bodies, and can't see taking a lens off while getting roosted on the side of an MX track somewhere!

I think I've gotten all my answers in this thread. I need two things: a longer lens, and some practice with my camera's parameters. Maybe I'll hit a local race next weekend and practice.
 

MX-727

LIFETIME SPONSOR
Aug 4, 2000
1,807
10
Just to clarify, depth of field is dependent on the aperture alone.
Link: Aperture Explained in Way too Much Depth

The exposure is dependent on the combination of aperture and shutter speed. You can see this if you take a picture at a given aperture and shutter speed. If you then put a neutral density filter on the lens and shot at the same aperture, but a slower shutter speed to compensate for the filter, the depth of field will be the same. You can preview the depth of field by pressing the DOF preview button on the camera.

As Tony said, shooting manual will give you the most control and you should do that to learn what different aperture vs. shutter speeds will give you. Unfortunately, on the new digital cameras, changing shutter speed isn't as easy as it was on say a Nikon FM. Simple dial on top of the film wind lever.

For action shots, you probably will find that the shutter priority mode is the easiest to work with. You set the shutter speed, 1/500 or 1/1000 work well to stop almost anything at the track. The camera will then select the aperture to ensure you get the right exposure.

One other thing about sports photography, if the subject is coming directly towards you or moving directly away from you, you can get away with a longer shutter speed. If it is moving across your field of view, you need to go with the higher speed.

If you want to pan, you can go slow, as low as 1/60, 1/30 or even slower. The aperture will be very small, maybe as small as f22 or even smaller (remember bigger numbers mean smaller apertures, look into the lens when you hit the aperture preview with various f-stops to see.) The small aperture means the depth of field will be very deep or long, but since you are panning a moving object, it will have a motion blur. As you discovered (13 is a very nice photo), motorsports photos look better when you pan with the subject to convey the sense of speed.

I don't like any of the pre-programmed modes. Not only do they control which kind of exposure priority is selected, but they also tend to mess with the autofocus modes, which I hate. I like to be able to know exactly where the lens is going to focus. The dumbest autofocus mode I've seen is the "closest subject" mode. Well, in too many situations, that just won't work. I like to choose exactly which quadrant is the hot spot. Portrait is just a modified aperture priority mode. In aperture priority, you set the f-stop to control depth of field and the camera picks the shutter speed. This works well for landscapes, portraits and other photos where the subject is not moving.

Look in the magazines that have the types of photos that you want to shoot and see if you can tell what the photographer did. TransWorld makes it easy, because they publish some of the exposure settings.

Remember that a flash has the effect of freezing the action. In order to get a motion blur, you have to use a longer/slower shutter speed than the default flash-sync speed.

Manual lets you control everything and makes it easy to bracket a photo to get different exposures. In the motocross example, you could set a 1/125 shutter speed, figure out the correct aperture from the cameras exposure meter and then shoot a series of pictures, one with the recommend aperture and two on either side of the "correct aperture." You may find that with a setting sun behind your back that one or two f-stops less than the recommended one produces a much warmer photo that really captures and conveys the time of day and looks more like what your eye was seeing at the time.

The really great thing is you can shoot hundreds of pictures and it doesn't cost you anything but time. It used to take rolls and rolls of film, hours in the darkroom and many dollars, plus you didn't get immediate feedback. Get good at cropping a photo in the viewfinder. Remember to look at the edges.

Of course the hours in the darkroom have been replaced by hours in front of the monitor. One thing that will help you at that point is if you are able to separate you emotional attachment to a picture you too from the actual photo. I've found that I do better when looking for keepers if I can look at them like others will.

As far as PhotoShop, remember that the "unsharp" mask is the choice way to sharpen an image. I know it's not intuitive, but try it. Fiddle with the settings and you'll see.

There is a lot that goes into a good lens. Better glass is the biggest thing, but you also need to be worried about the focus motor and the lens body construction. Is it metal or plastic? As far as the maxium aperture, some lenses will give you a f2.8 all the way out to 200mm while another f2.8 labeled lense will actually only do f4.5 at 200mm. Factor that in.

Tony explained ISO/ASA. With digital cameras, it just means how sensitive the CCD is to light. Higher numbers mean higer sensitivity, but you lose detail. In general shoot with the lowest ISO that you can use to get the exposures that you need. For example, I used to shoot night high-school football with ISO 800, 1/125 and between f2.8 and f4.5. And I was using a monster flash.
 
Last edited:

MX-727

LIFETIME SPONSOR
Aug 4, 2000
1,807
10
Ok, that last one was too long. Sorry, but I hope it helps.

Critique time.

13 is very good. Notice how RC is to the left of center, that leaves him someplace to go in the photo. It lets the viewer see where he is going.

10 is the flipside. He is about to run off the picture. Not nearly as interesting a photo.

12 is close to 13, but the banners and stake are very distracting. Probably an example of tighter cropping in the viewfinder. Photoshop it and crop out the banner and the guys who have lost their heads.

11 is a great picture except the focus is off. This is the downside of too short a depth of field.. The boot is in good focus, but his head, which is only a 12-18 inches closer to the lens is out of focus. It is also a good illustration of how autofocus can mess up. If you had been manually focusing, you would've focused on his face. Not saying to use manual focus, just be aware of the different modes of autofocus and how to make the camera focus where you want it to.

2 is pretty good. The autoexposure weighted the dark soil too much and overexposed the bike and rider. Using a center weighted exposure meter mode instead of an average weighting would help. You could also try the camera's auto bracketing. Tighter viewfinder cropping would've made the rider a bigger portion of the picture, which in turn would've made the exposure average out better, but you may want to show a wider shot in some instances.

1,3,4,5, 6 and 8 - tighter cropping. The longer zoom will help you here. 5 is the best IMO, just a bit tighter cropping would really help by getting rid of the distracting banner and stakes which serve to seperate the viewer from the action.

7 is a good shot. The only thing that is missing is any sort of perspective that let's us know how he got there and how high he really is. But, it's still cool.

9 is a good shot. Again, tighter cropping will help. The left 1/4 of the picture is dead space. Easy to fix in Photoshop, but remember that if you have to crop a picture a lot you are throwing away quite a bit of resolution if you then have to re-size the cropped image back up to an 8x10.

Seriously, the pictures are good and 7, 9 and 13 are very good. 11 should've been among those, the composition is great, but the autofocus got you.

See what I mean about really analyzing and being hyper-critical? Sorry if I offended you in any way, just trying to let you know how I analyze photos.

Have a blast!
 
B

biglou

Thanks Todd! I copy-pasted all this so I can read it when I should be working!

Yeah, I'm all over the unsharp mask. :cool: Been using it for a year or more now.

I'm going to search Amazon for a PS book to go along with Carlo's book suggestion.
 

Chili

Lifetime Sponsor - Photog Moderator
Apr 9, 2002
8,060
11
biglou said:
Chili says the AI autofocus is paramount for shooting action like MX.

Just to be clear it's AI Servo focusing mode that you want to use.

biglou said:
"Not bad considering the glass you were using" Chili says! :)

I'm going home to check my e-mail, I think I've been misquoted! :) I sure hope so as I didn't mean to refer to those pics as not bad by any means.

Like Tony mentioned the cost of the glass is "generally" a pretty good indication of the quality given the research I've done on glass the last year or so. That being said I would be reluctant to label the Sigma as a cheap or discount lens. The Sigma 70-200 f2.8 EX HSM APO lens I recommended to you is a top quality lens that performs very well in all tests I've found on it, with many questioning any noticeable difference between it and the revered Canon L glass version which is about $200 more.
 

a454elk

Mexicutioner
LIFETIME SPONSOR
Jun 5, 2001
7,538
18
The exposure meter on the 20D is like a ruler with "0" being in the middle. It's on the lower portion of the view finder and blinks if it's outside the upper and lower parameters. Good to use to see how adjusting the shutter speed , aperature and iso moves the meter around.

Tony, I absolutely love the 20D. With the image stabalizing lens I got, it makes indoor darker distance shoots alot easier with no tri pod.;)
 

Chili

Lifetime Sponsor - Photog Moderator
Apr 9, 2002
8,060
11
I wish I realized how important the AI Servo focus was for using for MX when I made my purchase as I likely would have bought the Nikon D70. Given that I now own some decent glass with canon mounts the 20D will be in my near future as well.
 

Tony Eeds

Godspeed Tony.
N. Texas SP
Jun 9, 2002
9,535
0
Chili said:
I wish I realized how important the AI Servo focus was for using for MX when I made my purchase as I likely would have bought the Nikon D70. Given that I now own some decent glass with canon mounts the 20D will be in my near future as well.


Nikon :fft: :)

I've always been a Canon man. Anybody still shoot film? I have 3 F1 Bodies and 9 FD series lens that I am getting ready to put on the evil auction site.

Seriously, to Chili's comments about lens selections, I would never knock the quality of Sigma or Vivitar lens without trying them out. They have come a long way since I purchased my first AE1 back in the early 1970's.

As Carlo said, the IS UCM lens are the state of the art at the moment and the L series glass is also at the peak. Evolution not Revolution is the name of the game in lens anymore with the use of computers for design of same.

One final thought, always try out a lens if possible before purchase. Many dealers will allow you to shoot photos in the store or you can often rent the lens that you are looking at. If you can shoot in the store, pick some buzy pattern that fully fills the viewfinder and shoot away. Go home and load them up and analyse your results.

Shoot the lens at a striped test pattern to determine the barrel distortion that you will get. Use the entire range of aperatures if possible. You will notice the difference. Watch for articles in the major mags on lens. They are not like moto mags in that they do not BS you, because they will quickly disappear if they do.

Sometimes an f4 prime lens is better than an f2.8 off brand lens.

I'm with Carlo on the IS lens. I love both of mine!
 

Kawidude

D'oh!
LIFETIME SPONSOR
May 23, 2000
1,386
0
You're right Loooo. #13 was the money shot. I thought it needed better banners behind RC though. See what you think.
 

Attachments

  • RC441.jpg
    RC441.jpg
    49.1 KB · Views: 147

SpeedyManiac

Member
Aug 8, 2000
2,378
0
I find my best bet for shooting action is to use either aperture priority (Av on mode dial) and set it on the widest aperture possible (with my camera it's between f2.0 and f3.0 depending on zoom) or use shutter priority (Tv) and set it on the fastest shutter speed available while maintaining a correct exposure.

For photoshop, I reccommend 'The Photoshop Book for Digital Photographers' by Scott Kelby. Great book, covers everything you need to know plus more.
 

JPIVEY

Sponsoring Member<br>Club Moderator
LIFETIME SPONSOR
Mar 9, 2001
3,180
0
Man Lou , they have got you covered, about all I can add is stay away from all auto modes and learn to do it yourself, dof is an artistic tool that you need to learn how and when to use; Lenses, the best I seen so far is the 80-200 2.8 Canon with IS ultrasonic, however I don't know if it will work with a Rebel ( it might though ) it has it's own motor so it's not dependent on the body, so focusing is super quick

Ummmm, UV yes, Polarizeing NO, Hood yes

ISO, if your camera has a CMOS sensor, you can get away with higher ISO's, if your's is like mine and has a CCD sensor, then stay around 200 or less, that will produce less noise on enlargements and you really don't need to go higher unless the lighting is really low

The only other thing I can add is, get in the habit of holding the camera in the portait position so you shoot more of this format


And Great pictures :cool: :aj:
 

Attachments

  • lou.jpg
    lou.jpg
    61.7 KB · Views: 136
Top Bottom