Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Canon Rebel XT - Can't get good pictures.

Reply
Thread Tools

Canon Rebel XT - Can't get good pictures.

 
 
JC Dill
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-04-2006
On Sat, 04 Nov 2006 15:56:54 GMT, philippe
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


>Thing of it is, he got *better* results with the point and shoot.


I'm not so sure about that. He got *different* results. It could be
that he gets better results (compared to his old camera) with the
default settings on this camera in other situations. Every camera is
different in how it interprets the light.

>expectations were there for DSLRs. How was the OP supposed to know that
>there's a learning curve to getting comparable results when starting
>with the Rebel(or any DSLR)?


There's a learning curve for anything that has multiple controls.
When you get into a different car, you have to learn how all the
controls react differently from your prior car. The brakes will react
differently, the steering will be sharper or softer, the turn signals
and shifter will be in slightly different locations, the heating
controls will work differently, your view from the driver's seat will
be different, etc. Ditto for a different camera.

>Calling him juvenile over it is fairly
>condescending, imho, and doesn't really add to the topic.


True, but now he's working on living up to the label rather than
proving it wrong.

jc

--

"The nice thing about a mare is you get to ride a lot
of different horses without having to own that many."
~ Eileen Morgan of The Mare's Nest, PA
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
ASAAR
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-05-2006
On Fri, 03 Nov 2006 22:59:04 -0800, JC Dill wrote:

> That's why a good camera has exposure compensation settings. EC is
> part of what makes the Rebel a better camera than a point-n-shoot
> camera. But it takes knowing what you are doing (e.g. being a
> photographer) to bring out the best in the camera. If you just want
> to be a shutterbug (point, click) instead of a photographer then you
> will waste most of the features of this camera and your photos will be
> no better than if you bought a point-n-shoot camera.


Not quite. There are many features that elevate DSLRs (and the
better P&S cameras) above most P&S cameras. EC though, doesn't
appear to be one of those features, as it seems to be nearly
universal. My first two digital cameras (S-series Canon Powershots
from 1999/2000) had EC even though they really had no manual
settings to speak of. These would be added to later Powershots.
Even the cheapest Fuji A-series cameras (A310, A330, A345, etc.),
intended as introductory cameras have EC. There may be some really
cheap point-n-shoots that don't have EC, but if there are any,
they're probably the type sold in convenience stores for little more
than the cost of disposable cameras. Surely not the OP's Canon G6,
which is one of the most sophisticated cameras available. It may
only be a point-n-shoot camera, but the G-series Powershots (and
some Olympus P&S cameras) are good enough for some pros to have
preferred using them in demanding field conditions over DSLRs.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
=?iso-8859-1?B?bWlubmVz+HR0aQ==?=
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-05-2006

JC Dill wrote:

> A camera (any camera) has no way to know if what you are aiming it at
> is white, or black, or a mixed scene. The way a light meter works is
> to assume that the scene is mixed, and to pick shutter/aperture
> settings to properly render a mixed scene. If the scene is lighter or
> darker than "average" then it will be under or over exposed unless you
> use Exposure Compensation to inform the camera how to adjust the
> automatic exposure to properly render the scene.
>
> That's why a good camera has exposure compensation settings. EC is
> part of what makes the Rebel a better camera than a point-n-shoot
> camera. But it takes knowing what you are doing (e.g. being a
> photographer) to bring out the best in the camera. If you just want
> to be a shutterbug (point, click) instead of a photographer then you
> will waste most of the features of this camera and your photos will be
> no better than if you bought a point-n-shoot camera.


Hm, can you (or somebody else) write more about this ? For example, I
bought a P&S camera, Panasonic LX1. This camera has a capability for
exposure compensation. It has different modes of light metering (spot,
weighted etc). It allows exposure bracketing shooting. It seems to me
that these are the same features which you say the DSLR has and which
allow me to 'squeeze' a better picture. Are there any features which
DSLR provides for better quality pictures and LX1 does not (apart from
the fact that LX1 has a smaller sensor and thus worse quality at high
sensitivities) ? Thanks.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Frank ess
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-05-2006
minnesøtti wrote:
> JC Dill wrote:
>

<snip>
>>
>> That's why a good camera has exposure compensation settings. EC
>> is
>> part of what makes the Rebel a better camera than a point-n-shoot
>> camera. But it takes knowing what you are doing (e.g. being a
>> photographer) to bring out the best in the camera. If you just
>> want
>> to be a shutterbug (point, click) instead of a photographer then
>> you
>> will waste most of the features of this camera and your photos will
>> be no better than if you bought a point-n-shoot camera.

>
> Hm, can you (or somebody else) write more about this ? For example,
> I
> bought a P&S camera, Panasonic LX1. This camera has a capability for
> exposure compensation. It has different modes of light metering
> (spot,
> weighted etc). It allows exposure bracketing shooting. It seems to
> me
> that these are the same features which you say the DSLR has and
> which
> allow me to 'squeeze' a better picture. Are there any features which
> DSLR provides for better quality pictures and LX1 does not (apart
> from
> the fact that LX1 has a smaller sensor and thus worse quality at
> high
> sensitivities) ? Thanks.


Just the one: if you need or want a focal length beyond the LX1's
range, you're stuck; dSLRs use subsitutable lenses, so you have a
wider or longer choice.

'Welcome.

--
Frank ess

 
Reply With Quote
 
philippe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-06-2006
JC Dill wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Nov 2006 15:56:54 GMT, philippe
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
>> Thing of it is, he got *better* results with the point and shoot.

>
> I'm not so sure about that. He got *different* results. It could be
> that he gets better results (compared to his old camera) with the
> default settings on this camera in other situations. Every camera is
> different in how it interprets the light.
>
>> expectations were there for DSLRs. How was the OP supposed to know that
>> there's a learning curve to getting comparable results when starting
>> with the Rebel(or any DSLR)?

>
> There's a learning curve for anything that has multiple controls.
> When you get into a different car, you have to learn how all the
> controls react differently from your prior car. The brakes will react
> differently, the steering will be sharper or softer, the turn signals
> and shifter will be in slightly different locations, the heating
> controls will work differently, your view from the driver's seat will
> be different, etc. Ditto for a different camera.


Not really the same thing, since "standard" reverses itself going to a
DSLR. With a p/s, auto is the default setting and you have to go out of
your way (so to speak) to get manual control.. DSLR assumes manual
control of most aspects of the shot. No?
>
>> Calling him juvenile over it is fairly
>> condescending, imho, and doesn't really add to the topic.

>
> True, but now he's working on living up to the label rather than
> proving it wrong.
>



P.
> jc
>

 
Reply With Quote
 
philippe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-06-2006
Dave Martindale wrote:
> philippe <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>
>> Thing of it is, he got *better* results with the point and shoot.
>> expectations were there for DSLRs. How was the OP supposed to know that
>> there's a learning curve to getting comparable results when starting
>> with the Rebel(or any DSLR)?

>
> Isn't that true of just about any piece of technology? If you buy
> something simple, it has limitations, but it can perform very well over
> the narrower domain that it is asked to handle. If you select something
> more capable and sophisticated, it operates over a much larger domain
> and even if it has an "auto" mode that can make fewer assumptions. So
> there are many more opportunities to have something go wrong. You have
> more capability, but you also need to understand the tool better and
> provide more input yourself.
>
> For another photographic example, if you take your film or flash card to
> the local drugstore, you get whatever their automatic machine provides.
> Most of the time it may be very good, but you don't have control. If
> you go to a pro lab, you get more input into what is done, but they will
> also let you screw up more freely. If you do all your printing at home,
> you get even more control, but then you need to be a lot more
> knowledgeable about how to use that control.
>
> Another (perhaps silly) example: If you're building a mechanical device
> and you use only the parts you can find in a hardware store, they'll all
> fit together but you won't have much range of choice. If you order
> parts from an industrial supply place, you'll have a much better chance
> to get exactly what you want, but you have to know how to determine
> exactly what you want. If you buy a lathe and a milling machine, you
> can make *exactly* what you want, but be prepared to spend a few months
> making junk until you learn how to use it.
>
> So I expect more sophisticated cameras to require more knowledge to use
> well, not less. Don't you?
>

Yes, but I've been surprised before, assuming that my 'current level of
knowledge' at this or that technology would easily transfer to the next
level. All I'm saying is that the OP's assumption is a natural one to
make and we've all, at one point or another, done the same thing.. Just
maybe not with photography, gauging on some of the answers I'm getting
here..



P.
> Dave

 
Reply With Quote
 
JC Dill
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-06-2006
On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 15:16:16 GMT, philippe
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>JC Dill wrote:
>> On Sat, 04 Nov 2006 15:56:54 GMT, philippe
>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


>> There's a learning curve for anything that has multiple controls.
>> When you get into a different car, you have to learn how all the
>> controls react differently from your prior car. The brakes will react
>> differently, the steering will be sharper or softer, the turn signals
>> and shifter will be in slightly different locations, the heating
>> controls will work differently, your view from the driver's seat will
>> be different, etc. Ditto for a different camera.

>
>Not really the same thing, since "standard" reverses itself going to a
>DSLR. With a p/s, auto is the default setting and you have to go out of
>your way (so to speak) to get manual control.. DSLR assumes manual
>control of most aspects of the shot. No?


DSLR cameras have many semi-automatic settings and most have at least
one "mostly automatic" setting. But it can't read minds. It can't
know when the scene is mostly white or mostly black, or when a fast
shutter or deep depth-of-field are called for.

Learning to use a DSLR could be compared to learning to drive a manual
shift sportscar when you only know how to drive an automatic sedan.
In order to get the full benefit of the extra features of the sports
car you need to learn more about how to drive.

jc

--

"The nice thing about a mare is you get to ride a lot
of different horses without having to own that many."
~ Eileen Morgan of The Mare's Nest, PA
 
Reply With Quote
 
Frank ess
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-06-2006
JC Dill wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 15:16:16 GMT, philippe
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> JC Dill wrote:
>>> On Sat, 04 Nov 2006 15:56:54 GMT, philippe
>>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>>> There's a learning curve for anything that has multiple controls.
>>> When you get into a different car, you have to learn how all the
>>> controls react differently from your prior car. The brakes will
>>> react differently, the steering will be sharper or softer, the
>>> turn
>>> signals and shifter will be in slightly different locations, the
>>> heating controls will work differently, your view from the
>>> driver's
>>> seat will be different, etc. Ditto for a different camera.

>>
>> Not really the same thing, since "standard" reverses itself going
>> to
>> a DSLR. With a p/s, auto is the default setting and you have to go
>> out of your way (so to speak) to get manual control.. DSLR assumes
>> manual control of most aspects of the shot. No?

>
> DSLR cameras have many semi-automatic settings and most have at
> least
> one "mostly automatic" setting. But it can't read minds. It can't
> know when the scene is mostly white or mostly black, or when a fast
> shutter or deep depth-of-field are called for.
>
> Learning to use a DSLR could be compared to learning to drive a
> manual
> shift sportscar when you only know how to drive an automatic sedan.
> In order to get the full benefit of the extra features of the sports
> car you need to learn more about how to drive.
>


My daughter learned to drive in a '66 Lotus Elan, and she's an
outstanding road and track driver. But not an outstanding
photographer.

What's my point? No point. I'm just saying.

--
Frank ess

 
Reply With Quote
 
Philippe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-07-2006
Frank ess wrote:
> JC Dill wrote:
>> On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 15:16:16 GMT, philippe
>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>> JC Dill wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 04 Nov 2006 15:56:54 GMT, philippe
>>>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>>
>>>> There's a learning curve for anything that has multiple controls.
>>>> When you get into a different car, you have to learn how all the
>>>> controls react differently from your prior car. The brakes will
>>>> react differently, the steering will be sharper or softer, the turn
>>>> signals and shifter will be in slightly different locations, the
>>>> heating controls will work differently, your view from the driver's
>>>> seat will be different, etc. Ditto for a different camera.
>>>
>>> Not really the same thing, since "standard" reverses itself going to
>>> a DSLR. With a p/s, auto is the default setting and you have to go
>>> out of your way (so to speak) to get manual control.. DSLR assumes
>>> manual control of most aspects of the shot. No?

>>
>> DSLR cameras have many semi-automatic settings and most have at least
>> one "mostly automatic" setting. But it can't read minds. It can't
>> know when the scene is mostly white or mostly black, or when a fast
>> shutter or deep depth-of-field are called for.
>>
>> Learning to use a DSLR could be compared to learning to drive a manual
>> shift sportscar when you only know how to drive an automatic sedan.
>> In order to get the full benefit of the extra features of the sports
>> car you need to learn more about how to drive.
>>

>
> My daughter learned to drive in a '66 Lotus Elan, and she's an
> outstanding road and track driver. But not an outstanding photographer.
>
> What's my point? No point. I'm just saying.
>

*very* cool... My daughter likes the lotus, but prefers Jaguar.. On
X-box, that is..



P.
 
Reply With Quote
 
dwight
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-07-2006
"Philippe" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:cR14h.59682$H7.39744@edtnps82...
> Frank ess wrote:
>> JC Dill wrote:
>>> On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 15:16:16 GMT, philippe
>>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>
>>>> JC Dill wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 04 Nov 2006 15:56:54 GMT, philippe
>>>>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> There's a learning curve for anything that has multiple controls.
>>>>> When you get into a different car, you have to learn how all the
>>>>> controls react differently from your prior car. The brakes will
>>>>> react differently, the steering will be sharper or softer, the turn
>>>>> signals and shifter will be in slightly different locations, the
>>>>> heating controls will work differently, your view from the driver's
>>>>> seat will be different, etc. Ditto for a different camera.
>>>>
>>>> Not really the same thing, since "standard" reverses itself going to
>>>> a DSLR. With a p/s, auto is the default setting and you have to go
>>>> out of your way (so to speak) to get manual control.. DSLR assumes
>>>> manual control of most aspects of the shot. No?
>>>
>>> DSLR cameras have many semi-automatic settings and most have at least
>>> one "mostly automatic" setting. But it can't read minds. It can't
>>> know when the scene is mostly white or mostly black, or when a fast
>>> shutter or deep depth-of-field are called for.
>>>
>>> Learning to use a DSLR could be compared to learning to drive a manual
>>> shift sportscar when you only know how to drive an automatic sedan.
>>> In order to get the full benefit of the extra features of the sports
>>> car you need to learn more about how to drive.
>>>

>>
>> My daughter learned to drive in a '66 Lotus Elan, and she's an
>> outstanding road and track driver. But not an outstanding photographer.
>>
>> What's my point? No point. I'm just saying.
>>

> *very* cool... My daughter likes the lotus, but prefers Jaguar.. On
> X-box, that is..
>
>
>
> P.


Not that anyone cares, but...

I bought my daughter an '88 Mustang convertible with stick (4-cylinder
slug), to teach her how to drive "properly." After two fender-benders, we
decided to put her in a point-and-shoot car (with automatic). The
convertible became my spare, my first ragtop, and later gave way to a '93 GT
convertible with auto.

My purely fun car is another '93 Mustang 5.0 with stick, which I much prefer
over the automatic. Bought that car new in 1993, and it's still with me -
hopefully for a long, long time yet. Still, for the daily commute and
rush-hour traffic, it's nice to have an automatic at hand.

I use my Rebel XT almost exclusively on manual settings. It's automatic
exposure seems a bit overblown to me, and I like a darker, more colorful
shot. Of course, I've missed a few "opportunities", while fumbling with the
settings, but, on the whole, I prefer to shoot on the fly.

Daughter has a little Canon SD200, and I doubt she ever ventures beyond
AUTO. Even so, she's picked up some nice images that I missed, either
because I had the "wrong lens" or messed up the aperture, shutter speed,
focus, etc etc etc

dwight


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon 350D/Rebel XT and 400D/Rebel XTi comparison and review Wayne J. Cosshall Digital Photography 3 10-20-2006 04:29 AM
Canon Rebel 350D/Rebel XT vs Nikon D70 Siddhartha Jain Digital Photography 48 03-07-2005 03:02 AM
get Canon D60 or Canon Rebel digital? ^____^ Digital Photography 7 02-27-2004 10:17 AM
Wanted: Good book to compliment the Canon EOS Digital Rebel 300D Tony Digital Photography 11 01-10-2004 09:33 PM
Canon Rebel 2000 (aka EOS 300) and Digital Rebel Lens Compatibility BPO Digital Photography 12 01-09-2004 06:12 AM



Advertisments