Recommended Posts

I'm looking at getting my first DSLR for Christmas. I'll mainly use it for taking photos of my dogs. Some stills but a lot of action shots of them doing agility. This kind of thing

scanned-image.jpg

But obviously it would get used other times, got a couple of weddings next year for example.

I don't want to spend a fortune as I am going to be learning. So it was looking at the entry level canon eos 1100d and nikon D3100. Both as a kit with a 18-55mm lens since it seems like the best deal to get started. I am leaning more towards to nikon. Will either of these be able to replicate that type of photo? I am guessing i'll need a shutter speed of at least 1/500 or 1/1000. Not sure what that means for exposures.

Will that standard lens give enough zoom/detail at a distance of about 10-20m away, or will i need a bigger lens? Maybe something like a 55-200?

I've read getting started stickied tread but that is a lot of information to take in. I just want to get something in my hand and start trying different things 8-)

Also is it worth waiting for the January sales,or will the prices remain constant until the newer models become more widespread?

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1118926-beginner-advice/
Share on other sites

The example photo you posted is probably taken with a longer lens, if you want to take photos at a distance a telephoto would be desirable.

Both of those cameras should be fine, however I'd say the Nikon is slightly better. I'd recommend lenses with stabilization (IS, VR) if you're getting Nikon or Canon which do not have in-body stabilization, I also think you should be fine with 1/160 for your exposures.

What is the total budget you are looking at?

Prices remain fairly consistent until new products are announced (for bodies), lenses usually retain their value much longer.

I think on a budget you could do well with a canon 55-250mm f4-5.6; it has decent range with IS. Consider picking up a used canon 450d or something similar; I've seen used ones listed for about 200 on amazon uk. although I've never bought a used camera from amazon, so I can't say what the pitfalls may be.

While used equipment will allow you to get a better deal, I wouldn't go for a camera body which is too old as ISO noise levels have decreased significantly over the last 3 years or so and the telephotos in your price range are usually f/4.5-5.6 models.

  • 1 month later...

I forgot about this thread so thought I would update it. I got the Nikon D3100 with that 18-55mm kit lens. I tried taking some photos with it and failed miserably. Argote's guess of 1/160 shutter speed turned out to be too slow, and all i got was a blurry dog. I needed to get upto 1/300 to get any kind of clear image. However because its been the winter all the shows have been in large barns/equestrian centres, meaning at the aperture that the kit lens had I came out with nearly a black image unless I went right to the top of the IOS range and lost quality. Zoom on it wasn't enough too so I did get a telephoto. I came into a bit money so bought a Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG Macro HSM. So the 2.8 aperture has made a huge difference and I got some great shots, still quite a high IOS though. Ill post one tonight.

I've been looking at a pros website and he puts the details of the pictures on, and in the summer events outdoors he was using a shutter speed at 1/1250 and 1/1400 with an aperture of 4 (ish) and IOS at 400. Cant wait until the Easter weekened which is when the first outdoor event is.

Well see how a green fence and the trainer distract from the subject, in this case, the dog. You need to move around and find better angles. And what focus are you using? AF-S, AF-C, A?

AF-C (AF continuous, sometimes called continuous servo) is good use when photographing moving objects. When your camera is set to AF-C and you focus on a moving subject, for example a dog running towards you, the focus will stay on the animal so long as your shutter button is held half way down. In other words, the camera will keep re-focusing as the animal moves. That is, so long as you keep your shutter button held half way down.

AF-S (AF single, sometimes called single area AF) mode, is good for photographing subjects that don't move, such as flowers or portraits etc. It locks the focus on the non moving object that you want to photograph. You can then recompose the shot and take the photograph.

AF-A is where the camera selects and goes between the last two modes. If it thinks the subject you are photographing is stationary, then it will automatically use AF-Sfocus mode. If it picks up that the subject you're photographing is a moving subject, then it will automatically use AF-C focus mode. This is also the default camera focus mode, unless you change the setting to AF-C or AF-S.

http://www.photographymad.com/pages/view/10-top-photography-composition-rules

Also, don't be afraid to use high ISO, you can remove some noise with post processing.

quick google search as an example:

dog-show-5.jpg

El-136o-anual-de-Westminster-Dog-Show-Club-se-celebrar%C3%A1-en-Nueva-York.jpg

Dog-Show-2009-29.jpg

This last one was taken by a Canon 5D Mark II ( and probably better lens) and notice the dogs face is completely isn't completely sharp.

ah right I'm with you, I tried to position myself so I could be in the best position to get 3 or 4 different shots per run. Might have been better to select one single shot to aim for.

I was using AF-A, I was focusing on the jump bar or the weave poles, and waiting for the dog to go to it and firing the. Would it be better to use AF-C and following the dog through?

I think this is better

DSC_1763_zps0f518b45.jpg

That's a better shot, though look at the botom legs how they appear to be the same distance as part of the fence, though, i'm nitpicking :p you could remove some of the noise in post processing for a cleaner shot.

AF-A does it good job, though it often hunts when deciding whether to switch to C or S. If your subjects is continuously on the move, you will be better off with AF-C. What you did was basically cheat the focusing system, which is perfectly fine, but then the camera metered for the white in the post and not the dogs white coat. You could also try exposure like (AE) Button if I recall correctly for same cases.

Don't get me wrong, your photos are pretty good, just pointing out some improvements.

Well see how a green fence and the trainer distract from the subject, in this case, the dog. You need to move around and find better angles. And what focus are you using? AF-S, AF-C, A?

AF-C (AF continuous, sometimes called continuous servo) is good use when photographing moving objects. When your camera is set to AF-C and you focus on a moving subject, for example a dog running towards you, the focus will stay on the animal so long as your shutter button is held half way down. In other words, the camera will keep re-focusing as the animal moves. That is, so long as you keep your shutter button held half way down.

AF-S (AF single, sometimes called single area AF) mode, is good for photographing subjects that don't move, such as flowers or portraits etc. It locks the focus on the non moving object that you want to photograph. You can then recompose the shot and take the photograph.

AF-A is where the camera selects and goes between the last two modes. If it thinks the subject you are photographing is stationary, then it will automatically use AF-Sfocus mode. If it picks up that the subject you're photographing is a moving subject, then it will automatically use AF-C focus mode. This is also the default camera focus mode, unless you change the setting to AF-C or AF-S.

http://www.photograp...mposition-rules

Also, don't be afraid to use high ISO, you can remove some noise with post processing.

quick google search as an example:

dog-show-5.jpg

El-136o-anual-de-Westminster-Dog-Show-Club-se-celebrar%C3%A1-en-Nueva-York.jpg

This last one was taken by a Canon 5D Mark II ( and probably better lens) and notice the dogs face is completely isn't completely sharp.

How do you create the DOF effect / blurred background?

How do you create the DOF effect / blurred background?

Narrow DOF is the result of 4 factors: Aperture, Focal Length, Sensor Size and Distance to subject. Those seem to be long lenses with wide apertures at medium distance with a DSLR (probably APS-C sensor).

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      579
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      74
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      71
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!