Advanced DSLRs as glorified point and shoot?!!

[arun_seetharam]

I am talking about the D80, D200, D300, D2's ns D3's. Everytime I go to the

field and see some serious armatures, semi-pros and may be pros shooting and

talk to them, I am surprised to see most using their mega equipment with mega

lenses like a glorified point and shoot!! What I mean by that is they use

programmed mode or apperture priority and things like that where the camera

decides most settings for their exposure. Makes me feel I am crazy and a control

freak to be wanting most things to be under my control. I shoot manual, I meter,

even manual focus at times and so on....When I ask them why dont you control, I

hear 'I dont want to be bothered about all that' This is for still subjects,

believe me!!

 

What do some of you semi-pros and pros think? Isnt it necessary to control the

camera to get some magical shots? Whats the best way to use these little

computers (D200/D3, D300/D3 etc)for a serious photographer?

[vivek iyer]

<i>I am surprised to see most using their mega equipment with mega lenses like a glorified point and shoot!!</i>

<p>

True! :)

<p>

Buy a D60 and use manual focus lenses with no chips in manual mode! :)

[Hector Javkin]

I'm an amateur, and I don't put everything on automatic, but I think that DSLRs make wonderful point-and-shoot cameras. They work better than regular point-and-shoot cameras at high ISOs, so they're easier to use without a tripod. The lenses are better. The sensors are better. The autofocus is much better. I just advise autopilot users to shoot raw+jpeg (which relatively few point-and-shoot cameras provide) so that any mistakes made in WB, etc. can be fixed by somebody later.

 

Besides, what do you care how others use their cameras? The larger the market for DSLRs, the more variety and quality that manufacturers will choose to give us. Those who use DSLRs as point-and-shoot cameras are actually helping.

[EricM]

it's only the results that count, not how you get there. this has been going on for donkey ages, long before digital.

 

what surprises me more though, now, is the amount of money a lot people invest in a decent dslr, a computer, and photoshop, and most often what you find is straight-from-camera jpg's that a p&s and a free re-sizing utility could have achieved.

[andrew_dodson]

I doubt that all pro's shoot manual- When shooting a basketball game or track meet or

something, it's much easier to set my iso at auto with a limit at 3200 (d300), and keep my

shutter at a certain speed in shutter priorty, it will normally choose 2.8 or 1.8/4 depending

which lens. Shooting in complete manual and focus is great when you have the time to shoot,

but when you are getting quick news photos, sports, etc... the auto features are key.

[ShunCheung]

There are a lot of beginners who use the Program mode, but I have been using that also since my 1989 N8008 that has Flex Program. In other words, I have been using P for almost 20 years. With Flex Porgram, you have full control of the aperture/shutter combination. In my mind, it is simply an improved A mode. There are reasons that Nikon has been putting P on the F5, F6, D1, D2 and D3 .... It is up to you to figure out how to take full advantage of it.

[hans_janssen]

There is nobody in the whole world, who can explain the better control of M above A or S. In 80% I use A, I look thruogh the viewfinder deceide if I have to +/- EV and press the exposure button. In M you can choose to over or under expose. What's the difference? I both cases the exposure meter in the viewfinder has the same reading. I'm not talking about studio or flash, that is the other 20% mostly M on the cam and iTTl on the flash. Also when yuou use a seperate lightmeter the story is different.

 

Last week I try focus manual, but the cam was better. I think that only works good when you mount a Katz-eye or when the focusspot lit instead of the green dot. But When you use manual focusing the focus aids of the camera you are working af with manual operation,still the camera deceides what in focus.

[johninjapan2000]

There are two schools of thought that compete for space/time in my brain:

 

1. The resultant image is the important thing. Whatever gets me there is okay. Sometimes that means using as much automatic stuff as I can afford.

 

2. It is the process that I am concerned with: light, depth of focus, stopping motion, composititon, whatever. In this case, slow and thoughtful is better, so manual is okay.

 

In either case, I am reminded of the old quote: If it's more than 500 feet from the car, it ain't photogenic. Generalized, this simply means that photo opportunities which require equipment I don't have with me, are to be ignored.

 

In other words, whatever equipment we have is only able to capture some subset of all theoretically possible images. Fortunately, each subset is equivalently infinite, so no matter what we have, there are endless photos to take. And adding equipment (or using equipment which can be used with both high and low degrees of automation) doesn't increase the infinitude, though it does open up other subsets.

 

Clearly then, the "point-and-shooters" have decided to pursue images that belong to that particular subset which requires a high degree of automation. Their choice is neither more worthy nor less worthy than any other choice.

 

Which means that, photographically, a D60 and a D300 and a D3 are equally worthy and serious machines.

 

Now that I have put you all to sleep, I will go to bed myself. It is 12:30am here.

 

john

[mark_chappell]

<I>What do some of you semi-pros and pros think?</i><P>

 

I wonder why you are so concerned with how others make photographs. Excellent images --

or utterly crappy ones -- can be made in fully automatic 'point-and-shoot' mode, or in fully

manual control-freak mode.

[walterh]

""or apperture priority and things like that where the camera decides most settings for their exposure.. "

 

So you are superior? Sometimes it helps to be informed :-P Most of the time aperture priority gives all the control I need (or shutter priority for some action), even for still objects. I can manual focus in aperture priority if I need to. I can AF a static object and often this makes more sense than MF. I know there are exceptions where it makes sense to select aperture and shutter speed manually but you are making a blanket statement.

 

"...I meter,..."

I meter too, I just use the LCD screen in the back and look carefully at the histogram. I can see blown out highlights by the flashing pixels on the screen. I "chimp" to verify focus. Is this less professional than using a hand held light meter or checking focus later on the print ?

 

Just stirring the pot?

 

Now your challenge :-) (Well not too serious but you started^^)

Best regards.

Walter

[carl_becker2]

Its up the the user to use technology to enhance technique. I feel many people would rather have technology replace technique. Great results can be achieved but its up to the user to fully understand the tools they use. What about spelling or using spell check (I am guilty of terrible spelling). Computers and math at the check out stand when caculating change.

[arun_seetharam]

Wow!! I am learning from you all. You are all such good teachers. Thanks so much...keep it coming.

 

There are two ways to learn in life. One is our own experience and the other is others experience. There is no third way. So, I am "concerned with how others make photographs".

 

True, only results matter. But if it was supposed to be used as a point and shoot, why, bigger the camera more the buttons and controls?

 

How about creativity? Ow yea....may be in the Photoshop? ;-)

[zane1664879013]

> But if it was supposed to be used as a point and shoot, why,

 

Better low-light performance, better viewfinder (many P&S don't even have one), ability to use powerful off-camera flash (or hotshoe flash), and a choice of good-quality lenses to suit the situation.

 

You seem a little too concerned about labels ("semi-pro", "serious photographer", etc.). The image is all that matters.

[Ed_Ingold]

I find it disingenuous for one amateur [sic] to criticize another for his tools or technique. For an amateur to criticize a pro in that way implies a profound misunderstanding of the process.

 

I've learned from long experience that "if you can buy it, don't build it." That works with cameras and the photographic process too. As long as the automatic exposure, focusing and other features work for me, I'll use them. When they don't, I won't. That way I can concentrate on getting the composition and the shot, whether action or landscape. For the majority of situations, I can rely on my equipment - but "majority" is not all-inclusive.

 

For portraits and landscapes, it's more important to be consistent than right (whatever "right" means). With multi-light setups, the camera can't set the exposure or lighting ratios, so I use an hand-held meter. For plays and concerts, I do manual exposures but take readings with the cameras' spot meter capability. Auto-focus doesn't work for macros or portraits - the camera is never pointed at the right spot at the time of exposure. Internal focusing changes the focal length, which confounds macro photography and stitched panoramas. That's just the short list :-)

[hiro]

Isn't that the point of all the advanced equipment? You "can" shoot in APriority or Flex program when there is no time to set up and still get excellent results or in manual mode when you have time and need the "exact" results.

[tri-x1]

Great pictures aren't made because the camera is on auto or manual. The photographer's "Eys" is what makes the difference.

[Dieter Schaefer]

I think Mark said it best: "Excellent images -- or utterly crappy ones -- can be made in fully automatic 'point-and-shoot' mode, or in fully manual control-freak mode."

 

I think it is important to understand when to trust the camera and when to use the fully manual mode to be in full control. Why fiddle with the manual controls if all you are doing is arriving at the same setting the camera would have selected anyway - only a hundred times faster than you? Why manual focus if the camera is doing a faster job?

 

I guess that is what Edward meant: "As long as the automatic exposure, focusing and other features work for me, I'll use them. When they don't, I won't." One just needs to learn and understand when it works and when it doesn't - choose the right tool to get the job done.

[ShunCheung]

Obviously there is composition and timing, but otherwise it comes down to aperture, shutter speed and ISO setting. There are several ways to reach the final aperture, shutter speed and ISO; it could be from all manual to (mostly) automatic with manual control. It doesn't really matter how they reach the final values, as long as you, the photographer, know what you are doing.

[larrybc]

Arun Seetharam wrote:

<br>

<br>> I am talking about the D80, D200, D300, D2's ns D3's.

<br>> Everytime I go to the field and see some serious armatures,

<br>> semi-pros and may be pros shooting and talk to them, I am

<br>> surprised to see most using their mega equipment with mega

<br>> lenses like a glorified point and shoot!! What I mean by

<br>> that is they use programmed mode or apperture priority and

<br>> things like that where the camera decides most settings for

<br>> their exposure. Makes me feel I am crazy and a control freak

<br>> to be wanting most things to be under my control. I shoot

<br>> manual, I meter,

<br>

<br>What's the difference between using Aperture priority and Exp. Comp. vs. using manual control for setting aperture and shutter speed? In both cases, you're looking at the meter reading and then adjusting the exposure based on your opinion of the meter's correctness.

<br>

<br>I use Aperture priority because it is FASTER than manually adjusting aperture/shutter.

<br>

<br>> What do some of you semi-pros and pros think? Isnt it

<br>> necessary to control the camera to get some magical shots?

<br>

<br>True, but your style of manual control isn't necessary for taking control. There are other routes to the same destination.

<br>

<br>> Whats the best way to use these little computers (D200/D3,

<br>> D300/D3 etc)for a serious photographer?

<br>

<br>Same as always. Learn the metering system's peculiarities and intervene when necessary, or ignore it and use your own eye to measure the light.

<br>

<br>larsbc

[bernie moore]

When I'm "hunting" I use the P mode. Many situations happen too quickly for me to think through all the possibilities. When I am shooting a plan then I have plenty of time to decide among the other options. Usually a tripod will tell you which mode I'm in. I probably do not shoot the way pros and semis do, in fact I don't even know how they shoot. I don't even know if I'm a "serious" shooter or not. How do you get so close to photographers to be able to read what their dials are set to?

[vivek iyer]

Where is that digital FM3a? :)

[ilkka_nissila]

One major difference is that in M mode, if the light is constant, it is easier to obtain consistent exposures between adjacent shots. With dslrs, I find myself adjusting curves individually for every shot. Thus consistency of the original exposure is not as critical as it is with film. When I must have exact original exposure, I bracket. I still use M mode when I shoot slides, use a tripod, use a flash, or when the lighting is not well handled by matrix. Most of my people photography is shot in A mode with matrix. I don't use P mode, it chooses by default too slow shutter speeds and constantly overriding it is tiring. But others like it and that's fine.

[mark_dalrymple1]

Like others here, I don't think aperture priority mode is a P&S cheater lamer mode.

Frequently DOF, ISO, and framing are the decisions I want to make - letting the camera

choose the shutter speed does not feel like cheating.

 

Plus having the full-on P mode is nice to have. I did a friend's wedding last weekend, but

was also playing music for for the ceremony. Got another friend to play assistant who

didn't have the time or desire to learn all the intricacies of the camera . I set him up in the

corner with a nice tripod and the camera in P mode (and even Auto-ISO!), and he got

some very nice images. Cheating? May be. I'm happy. The bride is happy. So who cares?

[brooks_lester]

unless all you do is controlled situation shooting.

 

I have my camera set to Aperture Mode because most of the time I would like to control DOF when

I'm shooting landscapes and still lifes. If my 1.5 year-old daughter happens to do something

spectacularly cute or new, I grab the camera and set it to Program or Green "Dummy Mode" and

snap away, concentrating on getting a good comp and pulling the trigger at "The Decisive Moment".

It's easier to do this when the camera can set exposure. Yes, I know C.B. was shooting full manual,

but he was in the street and would preset exposure and focus...

 

Once I get a moment to breathe, or my daughter pauses, I'll change to Shutter Priority or Aperture,

depending upon what DOF effects I'm trying to get, or how I want to deal with action in the frame,

and bump ISO, if needed.

 

If you are trying to move fast and/or occasionally want to get "grab" shots, don't poo-poo the P and

Dummy modes. They'll save you over time.

[ellis_vener_photography]

When not shooting with a lighting set up, where the camera is in manual mode, 98% of the time I put the D3, 1Ds Mark 2 or 1D MArk 3 into Aperture priority mode. I've been doing this long enough to know technically what I'm doing and what the camera is doing so I'd rather concentrate on "little things" like composition, framing, gestures and expressions of the subject, and lighting , as opposed to being distracted by fiddling with dials unnecessarily.

 

And if I have the D3 mounted on a tripod, I'll even use the Live View mode to very closely check focus by picking a spot in the frame and using the display's magnify feature, or just to avoid squinting through the viewfinder peephole.