Learned a valuable lesson today...

[Lord Blackadder]

Every time I think I'm getting the hang of photography I make a new mistake and learn a new lesson.

I was outdoors this weekend with some friends and took my Rebel XT along...there was some heavy fog but the sun was shining above it, so conditions were still bright. I had the camera in aperture priority mode and noticed that the speed chosen by the camera was very high, but didn't really think about it and went on shooting.

I downloaded the photos today and they were all very noisy...After checking my settings I realized I left it on ISO 1600 from the last time I took photos, when I was shooting at night! I'm bummed too, because I had some really nice shots that are great other than the noise.

But I'll always check my ISO before taking shots from now on...

 

[Abstract]

1. No you won't.

2. You'll make this mistake again, as do all of us at times. The most important thing is that you'll learn to check ISO if you run into this situation again. Next time, you may only take 5, 10, or 27 shots before realizing the ISO is at 1600, rather than at the end of the day when it's too late.

I do the same thing myself, but under certain conditions, I may recognize my mistake rather quickly.

 

[andmill]

Its a vary easy mistake to make

 

[epicwelshman]

Happens to the best of us. Luckily with newer cameras getting better and better at high ISO, it's not as big of a deal as it used to be.

 

[juanm]

Don't Canons have something like auto ISO? It's often handy

 

[M@lew]

Don't Canons have something like auto ISO? It's often handy

Only in Auto mode I think.

I used to do this a lot. Now I try to make sure every time I finish a days shooting I set my camera back to my default settings. Av with the widest aperture and ISO 200/400.

 

[Butthead]

I had the camera in aperture priority mode and noticed that the speed chosen by the camera was very high, but didn't really think about it and went on shooting.

I downloaded the photos today and they were all very noisy...I'm bummed too, because I had some really nice shots that are great other than the noise.

With larger pixels, the lower MP 300/350 Rebels should get you more fine detail. Ken Rockwell doesn't seem to think its noisy @1600:

http://kenrockwell.com/tech/iso-comparisons/2007-10/index.htm#1600

Noise comparison w/20D (same MP sensor as 350d):
http://kenrockwell.com/tech/dslr-comparison/index.htm

DxO Pro v.5 due out next month (or if you have Windows this month) should fix the noise issues and fix lots of other problem areas (unless you need to blow up the image for printing).

http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1191257320.html

Reviews of earlier versions:

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/dxo_optics_pro4.html

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/dxo/optics-pro.htm

Less expensive than DxO, Noise Ninja or Neat Image will also help w/noise only.

 

[Lovesong]

With larger pixels, the lower MP 300/350 Rebels should get you more fine detail. Ken Rockwell doesn't seem to think its noisy @1600:

http://kenrockwell.com/tech/iso-comparisons/2007-10/index.htm#1600

Noise comparison w/20D (same MP sensor as 350d):
http://kenrockwell.com/tech/dslr-comparison/index.htm

DxO Pro v.5 due out next month (or if you have Windows this month) should fix the noise issues and fix lots of other problem areas (unless you need to blow up the image for printing).

http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1191257320.html

Reviews of earlier versions:

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/dxo_optics_pro4.html

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/dxo/optics-pro.htm

Less expensive than DxO, Noise Ninja or Neat Image will also help w/noise only.

I don't mean to be argumentative, but I doubt there is a single photographer out there, that knows their a$$ from their elbow, and would actually consider anything Ken Rockwell says seriously.

While, yes the 350D does have fewer and larger pixels than say the 400D, this does not include more detail, but intrinsically lower noise.

The images themselves shouldn't be that bad to begin with, and if there is some noticeable noise, and you have PS, you can just despecle individual channels with relative ease to remove the noise (without buying Noise Ninja, or waiting for DxO).

 

[Abstract]

Ken Rockwell can take a photo almost as good using his crappy p&s as he can with a pro DSLR. It's true, he said so himself.

 

[epicwelshman]

Ken Rockwell can take a photo almost as good using his crappy p&s as he can with a pro DSLR. It's true, he said so himself.

That's because Ken Rockwell is a tech junkie and has all the creativity of an algebra equation. He does know a lot of tech info about cameras, but he's honestly not a very good photographer, imho.

I'm assuming you're being sarcastic, Abstract, but if you're not then I'm not challenging you, just so you know

 

[Westside guy]

I did almost exactly the same thing a couple years ago. Main difference was I'd left it at ISO 800 rather than 1600, so the noise wasn't too bad (but you can definitely tell the photos were taken at a higher ISO).

Nowadays I usually notice something out of the ordinary - say those absurdly short shutter speeds you mentioned - and then go find what's causing it before I've taken too many shots. But still, as Abstract said - I've made similar mistakes since then.

Hey, here's a boneheaded one I recently made a month or so ago. I was shooting some wide-angle photos, and was manually setting the focus at the hyperfocal distance. When I looked at the shots later, I noticed that the far background was just slightly blurry. That's when I realized I was calculating the hyperfocal distance in meters, but setting the lens in feet.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

Live and learn I guess. I don't have Photoshop right now, but do have access to it at work, so I'll have to see if I can do something with them.

 

[seenew]

I'm assuming you're being sarcastic, Abstract, but if you're not then I'm not challenging you, just so you know

how could you not take that as sarcasm?

 

[scotthayes]

That's because Ken Rockwell is a tech junkie and has all the creativity of an algebra equation. He does know a lot of tech info about cameras, but he's honestly not a very good photographer, imho.

I'm assuming you're being sarcastic, Abstract, but if you're not then I'm not challenging you, just so you know

As somebody who is new to photography (well, with more than a point and shoot) I may be wrong here, but this Ken Rockwell guy seems to be, as they say in my neck of the woods, a bit of a knob.

first off he's asking for money at the top of his page. second, he doesn't include a picture from the Nikon D40 as it doesn't do ISO 100, but includes one at 3200 for the Canon 400d, which the canon doesn't do so he uses Photoshop. 3rd he talks about using his Nikkor 70-210 "because it's so easy to set an exact focal length at around 78mm" So which is it exactly 78mm or around 78mm.

I've taken loads of bad pictures so far, but the more I play with the camera the better I get. But life should get even better when I get my Crumpler daily 600 bag, will always have my MacBook Pro with me when out with my camera, so will be able to transfer my pictures and check them before leaving where ever I am.

 

[Lovesong]

Ken Rockwell can take a photo almost as good using his crappy p&s as he can with a pro DSLR. It's true, he said so himself.

Pluto was demoted as a planet because Ken Rockwell took a picture of it.

Uranus is next.

 

[ChrisA]

The key is to remember what a "reasonable" exposure is. One rule that works is f/16 and shutter at 1/ISO in bright sunlight. Open up a stop for overcast or shade. So if you noticed my camera wanting to shot at f/8 and 1/1600 I'd would know the IS was at 1600.

People with automatic camera almost never learn this stuff. Same thing with a calculator. when you use it to compute 103.4 / 52.43 it is good to think first that the answer will be something close to "2". Then when you get .002 you know you forgot the enter a decimal point. Same with an automatic camera, it is good to estimate what is reasonable so you can spot a mistake.

Making a point to always remember never works because you forget to remember to always remember. You came very close to the correct solution, you did the first step, notice that thwe shutter speed was "odd" but then failed to askyourself "why".

 

[Westside guy]

Pluto was demoted as a planet because Ken Rockwell took a picture of it.

So he's the anti-Norris?