Camera Question

[elliot]

I see alot of people here all get high quality pictures. Is it because you have a good camera or is it your settings.

Make: Canon
Model: Canon PowerShot A95
Shutter Speed: 1/60 second
F Number: F/2.8
Focal Length: 8 mm

this is what i have

[Coolman]

How many mega pixels is yours?
your shutter speed, F Number and focal length are all adjustable, so yeah depends on the photo for what you have them on.

I am assuming by quality you mean like clarity how ah "good" it looks, alot of it depends on the photographer, but Megapixels and image sensor size come into play as well. basicly bigger they are the better quality and bigger price as well.
I'm rabies will add to this thread, he'll know haha.

[MartinBabies]

First of all, what exactly do you mean by "high quality"? Do you mean the image quality? A camera always saves the image with the best compression possible if you shoot in JPG. However, the ISO value plays a part in how the outcome will be. ISO is the camera's (or film's, if you use an analog camera) light sensivity. ISO also determines how grainy you image will be. A low ISO number, like 50 or 100 will give better quality as the picture will have as little grain as possible. A high ISO value like 1600 will give a very noisy/grainy image but with higher contrast and possibility for faster shutter speeds.
Noise, or grain, can be removed with certain programs, like NeatImage.
I believe you can set the ISO on your camera, as it is a Canon. On my small compact camera I can't, but I'm pretty sure you can. Look in the camera's menu.

Also, the quality of a lens can also be seen. A lens that costs $5000 will have a much sharper and better result than the lens you get with your first SRL camera. Buuut no one on this forum has a $5000.

And then of course, post processing can play a big part in the image quality. There are tons of tricks... ;P

[elliot]

Here is just a basic picture of me (and my one eyed dog :P)

http://i20.tinypic.com/23ixh0p.jpg

look at the quality compared to say, something like this

http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/6...20312loso6.jpg

Its like comparing regular tv to High definition i guess, it just overall looks better.

Say i try to take a picture of my eye, its all blurry and stuff, even on portrait mode

[MartinBabies]

Okay well first of all, the focus in your picture isn't on your torso or head, it's on your pants. So focus right first. Then you could sharpen it up in Photoshop as you probably won't get a really sharp result with that camera. Compact cameras have pretty cheap lenses which aren't very sharp. Also, if you shoot at low resolution, you get less detail than on a high resolution image, so change that if you haven't already.
When you try to take a picture of your eye, you would actually need a macro lens to get a really good result. I don't think any of my lenses would perform well at this at all. But if you sharpen it correctly in Photoshop you could get a decent result anyway.

[Peksa]

A little off-topic perhaps, but Martin, what kind of lenses do you own now, do you still have the 350D?

[MartinBabies]

The kit lens, EF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6, EF 75-300mm f/3.5-5.6. So I still don't own any "real" lens actually. I don't have any money, hehe. And when I got money I bought two new guitars instead, l0l. I'm thinking of getting a decent normal zoom though. Like the Canon 24-70, but a cheaper one.

[Peksa]

The kit lens, EF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6, EF 75-300mm f/3.5-5.6. So I still don't own any "real" lens actually. I don't have any money, hehe. And when I got money I bought two new guitars instead, l0l. I'm thinking of getting a decent normal zoom though. Like the Canon 24-70, but a cheaper one.

I've tried the 24-70/2.8, it's huge and weighs a ton but it's a great lens. I have the 17-40/4, which is.. sort of, a cheaper normal zoom lens. I can recommend it if you don't need the bigger aperture. I hear tamron has a good 17-50/2.8 if so.

[Coolman]

Basically Elliot if your looking to get into photography, SLR cameras are a good choice, all brands have an entry level SLR, I use a canon as well, 400D same as martins pretty much.
If you not ready for SLR, just practice more with your camera, just make sure the photo is in focus, got some decent light in the area, ISO to 100, it could be set on auto. just leave the rest on auto, should get some decent shots.

[MartinBabies]

I've tried the 24-70/2.8, it's huge and weighs a ton but it's a great lens. I have the 17-40/4, which is.. sort of, a cheaper normal zoom lens. I can recommend it if you don't need the bigger aperture. I hear tamron has a good 17-50/2.8 if so.

Thanks for the tip, that Tamron lens seems interesting.. The Canon 17-40 L is a little bit too expensive for me. Don't have a job. ;(