Hi,

Here is a recent photo I took with my Nikon D60 + 18-55mm Kit lens.

I purely stuck it on aperture priority and just snapped. I want to start taking better shots and although I understand aperture and ISO sensitivity, I don't feel I'm getting the best out of my shots.

Any advice much appreciated and possibly what you would have done differently, I was getting the sun reflecting a lot from the car which I wasn't quite sure how to deal with, it seemed to give the car a pink effect rather than red

Cheers!

I'll be first then!

It's obvious that you want to show off your car and improve your photography - good on you! And you have a good camera (shame about the lens - more on that later!)

It's also obvious that this was taken in strong sunlight with a relatively clear sky (a few fluffy ones by the looks of it) but you took it while the sun was not hidden. Probably about 10.30 am or 2.00 pm (give or take 30 mins either way). You also took it while stood up with the camera at eye height. You had the camera set on AV (nice one - I shoot 90% of my pictures on AV) and chose the long end of your lens (55 mm - c.88 mm on 35mm equivalent) both of which were sensible choices.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong so far...

When creating photographs (as opposed to taking pictures) there are certain things that need to be thought about and also a priority order for these.

1: Light: should be soft and directional rather than harsh and overhead;

2: Background: tone & texture need to work with the subject and compliment it not compete with it;

3: Composition: height of camera, angle to subject, positioning of subject within frame, etc., etc.

My suggestions would be to try the following:

Shoot on cloudy days (light will be softer) and in the early morning or late evening (light will be less harsh and will also be more directional) or shoot just inside car parks, barns, etc. where the light will again be less harsh and more directional (but don't put the car in the light - put it in the shade). This will also help with reflections on your paint work and windows (see polarising filter later).

Move the car further from the background as your background is almost in focus (large depth of field - probably around f5.6 depending upon how far you were away from the car - and at the /long' end of your lens: 55 mm) and is competing for attention with your car. It does not add to the story, but draws the eye away from the subject. The issue is that your lens / camera combo will not allow you to gain shallow depth of field (DoF) and 'separate' your car from the back ground (unless the background is a long way from your car).

Your 'stock' lens only goes down to (probably) f5.6 at the telephoto end (55mm) and around f4 ish at the wide end. These will not allow you to gain a shallow depth of field (especially as you have a cropped sensor - please don't ask me to explain that one - which reduces the apparent DoF).

If you upgrade anything in the future choose to spend money on you first (training), then better lenses (a 50 mm f1.8 would be a brilliant and cheap choice) and don't upgrade your camera until it breaks (I'm a pro shooting on a camera that was released 7 years ago - and it's still going strong and more than good enough for the job).

Read up on composition: especially the 'rule of thirds' as you have chosen t place the car slap bang in the centre of the frame.

Play around with your position by varying the altitude you hold the camera at. For example, you can make the car look more 'aggressive' and mean by getting very low to the ground and using a wider angle to your lens (between 18 mm & 30 mm as a guide). Or can focus the attention on certain aspects (the alloys for example) by going telephoto (55 mm) getting closer and using the smallest aperture you can (probably f5 at 55 mm). Simply getting on your knees and taking the picture would have moved the boats and masts lower down and possibly hidden them behind the car, jetty, etc. but might have brought in the sky above the trees (which brings in other issues to consider and I rarely shoot pictures with the sky in it unless there is a very specific reason to do so. e.g. sunset, interesting clouds, etc.

Get a polarising filter as this will reduce the reflection from your windows & shiny paint work (well done - looks good) massively. Make sure it is a circular polariser otherwise the autofocus will be confused. Once you have it fitted to your lens (screw thread diameter should be on the the front of the lens) turn it until you see the sky darken and the reflections disappear. There is an ideal angle to the sun to stand to achieve the best effect (try it with the sun directly behind and then with the sun at 45 degrees then at 90 degrees to see what I mean).

Please don't take this as criticism of your picture. I quite like it. All my advice is meant as helping you learn and develop (I can't ever get away from being a teacher), so feel free to throw questions back at me and I'll see what I can do to help.

Good luck, keep practicing and don't let anyone knock you for driving a 'pink' Fabia Vrs.... (I'll explain how to get that sorted in another lesson)

Before anyone asks, I don't photographs cars, but I do photograph weddings and teach photography as well!

HTH

+1 on the composition bit, i take it thats a kit lens? Rather soft but hey sharp isnt everything.

Yon fella above me knows his onions, so read and take note. What more can one add

Thank you for both posts!

@Lofty79 Yes it is a kit lens, I'm looking to upgrade to either a Tamron or Sigma at somepoint, ideally a 70-300mm because I want to start doing some motorsport photography.

@KBPhoto Wow! Thank you for spending the time to give such a detailed reply. You are spot on! The photos were taken free standing at eye height, I took some more to experiment with different heights. I'll put them at the bottom of this post.

It's good to know that shooting on Aperture mode can achieve decent pictures and it doesn't necessarily need to be on Manual.

With regards to a filter to reduce reflection - http://www.ebay.co.u...=item19bc4b273d is that sufficient for my camera?

It's good to know that the camera is good enough to take decent photos. I think the lens options is where I struggle. So a 50mm lens isn't a zoom lens but it allows for better DoF because it's f1.8?

Is this what you mean? http://www.amazon.co...&hvptwo=&hvqmt=

I'm reading up on what you said, thanks again for your response!

Some more:

No problem, glad to be able to help.

The polarising filter you link to appears to be the right size and type, but at less than £6 I doubt the quality of glass and coatings will stand up to much in the long run. However, it is probably a reasonable match for your current lens. For that money, I guess it is probably worth getting to try out polarising filters and see if they are for you before investing more money in a decent one.

As a lot of Nikon lenses uses the 55mm thread size, it might be worth investing a bit more in this filter at some point as you will have less problems with reflections in the lens and filter glass ad also with 'flare'.

It's good to know that the camera is good enough to take decent photos. I think the lens options is where I struggle. So a 50mm lens isn't a zoom lens but it allows for better DoF because it's f1.8?

In short, yes. But you need to use the lower number (bigger) apertures to be able to get the shallower DoF. Try around f2.8 - you will be amazed!

The lens you link to on Amazon is a good one. Solid build and quality glass. Take a look at the f1.8 G versions for DX sensor sizes (like yours). Both will work, but the latter will probably be faster focussing, the former better build quality.

I'll comment more on the pictures later, but they look pretty good efforts. Review them yourself based upon what I have advised in my previous post and tell us what you think of them. That will probably help you learn more than me telling you what I think...

Try and get a fixed prime 50mm lens with an f1.8 these are astonishing in picture quality and very hey good in low light si****ions. Also there are few good 70 - 300 lenses but the sigma is the better, although it has to be the one with the apc coating IIRC this one is a sharper glass. I always would use my 50mm though and zoom wiv ma feet. Things like removing the bollard that is reflecting in the door of one pic, cutting out the wheels of the other car in another. However the one from back looking over harbour is composed well, masts are in boats are complete, and the emphasis is still on the car

@Lofty79 and @KBPhoto:

Thanks, I'll definitely look at getting that a 50mm lens then. That's good to note, I didn't even think about the wheels from that other car. I guess it all distracts from the main focus which is my car. So you change the DoF by changing the aperture? How would you modify that if you have it on AV mode or does it have to be in Manual mode?

I'll try that cheap filter just to experiment, I also have a hood that came with my camera. Does that have any real advantages?

Take a look at the f1.8 G versions for DX sensor sizes (like yours). Both will work, but the latter will probably be faster focussing, the former better build quality.

^ That's the bit I'm struggling with what's the DX sensor sizes? Is it a standard size on the D60? There is so many lens options, I'm confused by it!

I apologise if the questions seems stupid, I just have no experience of this whatsoever!

Well looking at my photos, I feel they aren't particularly sharp. I follow a photographer called Dan Fergent - https://www.facebook.com/pages/Dan-Fegent-Photography/116765711730600 and hopefully aspire to get half as decent shots as his!

Thanks again for all advice.

AV mode is aperture priority mode. You set the aperture (which directly affects the DoF as well as the amount of light entering the lens/camera/sensor) and the camera will automatically set the shutter speed (and possibly the ISO if Auto ISO has been set on - personally, I wouldn't).

Your camera (and almost all DSLR's) has a DX sensor. It is smaller than a 35mm film negative (if you remember those). A full frame sensor - FX for Nikon users - is the same size as the 35mm negative.

Most things we refer to in photography are based upon 35mm film photography (focal length, film speed, etc.) - just to confuse the novice! (And for the purist / traditionalist / elitist) **

A DX sensor (APS-C for Canon users) is a smaller sensor size than a full frame. This has an effect on focal length, DoF, ISO ability, etc.

When choosing a lens, decide what you are going to photograph first (this will enable you to determine focal length & aperture required), set a budget, use the Camera Price Buster website to find the place with the best prices and then enjoy learning how to get the best out of your new lens.

I've looked at the link and I reckon that the 50mm lens on your camera will see you a long way towards achieving these kinds of results (or better). read back over the advice I gave earlier and always remember that the light (quality, direction and strength) is the most important aspect in creating a photograph.

Once you have achieved photos like Dan Fergent's (which shouldn't take long) you aim higher and look to someone like Tim Wallace for inspiration!

** Delete as applicable.

Aperture f1.8 (big opening) Shallow depth of field, lots of light.

F22 (small opening) low light, greater depth of field.

f8-f11 usually the sweet spot where the lens is at its sharpest, with workable light levels.

all depends on the si****ion and what you require from that specific photo. If its dull and you need good depth of field, a tripod would be essential.

Aperture f1.8 (big opening) Shallow depth of field, lots of light.

F22 (small opening) low light, greater depth of field.

Correct, but a little misleading.

f22 lets very little light into in the lens - it is not for 'low light' si****ions. Use f22 when you want everything to be in focus from front to back and you have lots of light (or can use long exposures / shutter speeds).

f1.8 is indeed a big aperture (physically) and does give shallow DoF and does let lots of light into the lens and should be used for 'low light' scenarios (I almost said situ*tions...)

f8-f11 usually the sweet spot where the lens is at its sharpest, with workable light levels.

This is correct on most lenses - they provide the sharpest images at least 2 stops below their maximum aperture. The f1.8 lens will be sharp from f4 to around f18 with minimal noticeable loss of sharpness to the layperson outside of this aperture range.

However, at f8 the DoF will be greater than in the original photo. The OP wants to achieve images like those on the FB link, so a bigger (physical) aperture (smaller f number) than the original f5.6 will be required. I suggest f4 (I shoot this aperture all day at weddings) or below of a DX sensor (try f2) to get the shallow DoF effects required.

I have an f1.4 50mm lens and will shoot at f2 quite happily (I don't shoot at f1.8 because focussing with so little DoF is rather tricky).

i just remember my early photography days and that simple explanation got me going. but as you say i should of said "lets little light in" now i read it back

of course greater dof can be achieved bt selecting a background that is further away, better to get the correct lens though. I have adapters and use fully manual vintage lenses giving a shallow dof such as this at f1.4:

not a great pic just a demo

Edited 26 June, 201214 yr by Lofty79

Can I suggest that if you really want to read up on all this rather than just grab snippets of the advice from above, get a copy of Complete Digital Photography by Ben Long here:-

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/1435459202/ref=oh_details_o00_s00_i00

You can also learn a great deal from websites like http://cambridgeincolour.com

The factors that affect depth of field are:

Distance from camera to subject

Aperture - Smaller numbers (larger aperture) create shallower depth of field

Focal length of lens - Longer focal length the shallower the depth of field.

Sensor size - you can't change that unless you buy a new camera!

Ideally you want to shoot with a longish focal length with the car as close to the camera as is comfortable and suits the composition you are looking for. You need the background to be as far in the distance as you can get it. Try to pick uncomplicated backgrounds to make the subject stand out. Then, stop the aperture down from maximum aperture (shallow depth of field) until the car is pretty much all in acceptable focus. I guess you'd like the badge in perfect focus, so use that as a focusing target. Focus will drop off towards the back of the car but it's less important there.

The 50mm f/1.8 or larger, combined with a APS-C sensor camera like the D60 will give you an effective focal length of 75mm in comparison to 35mm size full frame camera... This will give a slight telephoto effect which is very useful for flattering portraits as it compresses perspective slightly thus flattening features. Great if the person you are shooting has a big konk!

You have been well instructed here, I believe the 50mm lens should be in every photographers' arsenal... a very versatile bit of kit.

Have fun!

38 years behind the lens - I have my own photography company.

I'll be first then!......

Very interesting read Karl, thanks

With regard to filters (a separate UV and circular polarising) is there much point in getting say Hoya Pro1D over their cheaper HD or HMC etc versions when coupled to a kit lens (Canon 550D, 18-55 IS & 55-250 IS im my case) as I assume there probably comes a point where the filter quality will be better than the lens itself?

I currently use a Jessops UV filter which AIUI are not that great quality wise - I have read they are made by Hoya, but are only there basic filter quality, so would like to get another UV filter and try a polarising one as well, but don't want to buy a cheap and nasty eBay special that will probably reduce the photo's quality, likewise I don't want to spend more than my current lens's will warrant.

:wonder:

First off, can I ask why you use a UV/skylight filter?

Reason for asking is that I bet you can't tell the difference between a picture with the filter and a picture without.

Try it and see.

If it is just for protection, then consider how you store and treat your lenses. I tend to throw mine in the camera bag without a thought. I do keep the bag clean, but I've never scratched a lens yet (not the glass anyway).

I don't know (m)any pros who use UV filters as any extra glass in front if the lens can affect the picture in some way.

I only use polarisers when I want the extra saturation or to reduce reflections.

My advice? Save money on the UV and buy a slightly better polariser and keep this when you upgrade lenses later (just check what size filter thread the better lenses in your range use. Canon are 77mm & Nikon 67mm I think).

Just a habit that I was taught years ago - it's better to damage a filter than a lens, 95% of my shooting is outdoors so it also keeps the lens clear from dust and rain, and as you say I can't tell the difference with a picture taken with or without it (a pro maybe able to? ... but I ain't no pro ) so I look at it as cheap lens insurance - hopefully never needed, but there just in case.

If you use a lens hood, the front element will be protected from rain & damage as it effectively has a hard umbrella around it.

They also reduce lens flare, especially in cheaper lenses which have less effective coatings.

If you do bang the glass hard enough to break the filter it will almost certainly damage the front element of the lens as well. And you will have lots of glass shards to make it worse.

You won't get dust inside your lens via the front element and dust on the filter is no worse or better than dust on the lens.

I have lenses worth over £1000 each and had them used professionally at weddings for over 6 years with no filters and no damage.

I had one on a tripod go over (no lens hood) and into mud. Cleaned up easily enough and no damage to glass but slight scratch to black paint on the filter ring.

Stop worrying, save your money and start taking more pictures...

Just came across this piece of education in my inbox from Tim Wallce...