mark_stevens9

<p>I was involved with several groups of kids doing a scavenger hunt, and one of the things was to get a pic in front of the local power plant. You had to drive a winding road (and know which one to get there). Anyway, one of the groups were told by security personnel they could not take any photos in front of the place, even though they were taking shots from a public road. The kids were obviously posing in a group and being silly. Not sure how that gets mistaken for terrorists, but ok maybe it's their rules.<br>

Anyway, it seems to me that Google Earth, Google Maps and the like probably do more to compromise security than some P&S photos at ground level. The detail in some of those pictures are quite good in areas. That's our good old US govt.</p>

<p>I read somewhere that AF points work better in one orientation better than another, so I doubt it's the camera.<br>

Some things I've noticed...I was getting a lot of oof shots with my XTi, and began to wonder if the camera was focusing badly. After paying closer attention, and couple of things came into focus (sorry for the pun).<br>

I have set my focusing point to center only, and get many more keepers. When there are objects in the foreground the camera might catch a side focusing point, leaving the main subject oof. Even my friend's new 7D does it. The camera doesn't know what we are trying to photograph so it seems to pick up things that may be of better contrast (right or not). When the subject is moving it can really be difficult (ex. elk moving through trees). For most situations I just focus with the center point only and recompose if needed. Works for me. Static subjects allow a little more time to recompose.<br>

Another thing killing my shots were depth of field. When shooting a big aperture the depth of field is narrow, and the closer you are to the subject the less forgiving it is. It can get very touchy! Sometimes you may have to stop down. If you want the big aperture, use a tele and stand back further. I have to constantly remind myself to watch dof or I pay the price.</p>

<p>First-time poster here. IMHO, I think that having the right techniques trumps equipment. However, as a person progresses in the hobby and gets the basics down, there are shots that simply aren't possible without the right lenses.<br>

I started out with an SLR and a kit lens, and soon after got a cheap tele zoom like lots of people do. After a short time I found that the kit lens just couldn't get all the shots I wanted, the telezoom was too slow, too blurry and loaded with CA on the long end.<br>

I finally got it through my head to go out and by a fast f2.8 standard zoom lens, which gave me a workable setup, for most situations. I then decided to go whole hog and ditch the cheap tele for an f2.8 tele zoom. I now have a rig that can do most of what the expensive setups can do. In the meantime I'm saving up for a better body.<br>

If I had done the reverse, then a great body wouldn't have been able to compensate for crappy lenses. Of course, having the best of both is certainly the way to go.<br>

Now, I'd tell someone to get rolling in the hobby with a decent SLR that doesn't break the bank, coupled with a fast walkaround lens or a cheap 50mm. You can always upgrade the body and still have those wonderful lenses by your side that will be even more fun to use.</p>