Settings recommendations for the Beach with kit lens?

[bshannon]

What settings would you recommend for a 350D with kit lens for taking pics of kids at the pool, beach, sunsets, etc. I have a tripod, so that is an option for the low light shots.

I'm taking my g/f and her 2 kids to the beach this weekend and I would really like these pics to turn out :)

Thanks for any help you can muster up!

[fionndruinne]

Well, the first thing that comes to mind is "polarizer". A circular polarizer is important for taking some of the glare and reflection off the water, and giving you a better blue sky and such.

[D Thompson]

If it's bright & sunny then use f16 and reciprocal of your ISO.

ISO100 - 1/100th
ISO400 - 1/400th
etc.............you get the idea.

[nqjudo]

Those places can present some difficult exposure situations with the bright light creating a lot of contrast. I assume that you'll be there during the mid-day hours. You could use some fill flash if there is shadowing that you want to reduce.

When I take pictures of my niece and nephew around the pool I usually maintain a shutter speed of 1/250 or faster to avoid blur... the fast little buggers. You could use Tv mode and a fast shutter speed for the most part to keep the blurred shots to a minimum. You could switch over to Av mode and use a wide aperture (smaller f/number) to better isolate subjects for still portraits.

[noyjimi]

Compositionally, try to keep the horizon level. Try not to bisect the frame. Have fun.

[bshannon]

Thank you all for the recommendations. I have a circular polarizer filter, as well as a UV filter to protect from sand.

Is there any problem with having both filters on while shooting?

[Rooz]

Thank you all for the recommendations. I have a circular polarizer filter, as well as a UV filter to protect from sand.

Is there any problem with having both filters on while shooting?

you dont need the UV on if you have a CPL. best not to stack filters as it degrades IQ.

[GaryS]

Here is a crazy suggestion... Use a flash.

A flash helps reduce the high-contrast light that you get on people when its a bright day on the beach, it removes the shadows and makes the pics come out much better.

Unfortunately, the built-in flash isn't much good, because it limits your shutter speed to 1/200, which is probably too slow. However, an accessory flash like a 430EX can 'high speed' sync, which will let you use whatever shutter is required.

You can try the builtin one if you can get the shutter speed down....

[coldrain]

Low light beach photos? Ar eyou exprecting thunderstorms? ;)

There will be enough light during the day, and no tripod will be needed.

f8 and the appropriate shutter speed will do in most situations, with ISO 100 or 200. You will not need a pol. filter, reflections of water are fine in photos. So.. only use the pol. filter if you want to make the sky more blue.
A pol. filter is very difficult to use anyway, on your kit lens with rotating front element. You can put the UV filter on to protect the lens from sand, but you can also leave it off. It is upto you.

Set the camera to your liking regarding saturation and contrast.

If you shoot pics of people into the light, then pop up your flash to fill in the dark people against the light background. If you shoot at night, the night portrait mode of your camera will do the same, it will provide fill in flash to let the light taht is available add to athmospher, the flash will not kill the shots totally.

[bshannon]

Just got back and looked at my pics. I've got serious noise in 90% of the pics. I shot in Tv and Av modes. I downloaded the trial version of Noise Ninja and it worked really well, but I'm hesitant to spend $35 for the standalone version :) Is there a free way to remove the noise?

[timmciglobal]

What ISO?

Post a sample?

Tim

[bshannon]

What ISO?

Post a sample?

Tim

Taken at ISO800, f/22, 1/400

http://www.bridgetotheweb.com/pics/RebelXt/IMG_0575_sm.jpg

[toriaj]

Noiseware and NeatImage are both free. Noiseware is automated, Neatimage has manual controls (and a version you can buy, but I use the free version.)

(By the way, your settings on the above photo were 1/400 sec., f/22, ISO 800. The high ISO gave you the noise (which I don't think is too bad, by the way.) You don't need an aperture that small. Next time, try an aperture more in the f/8-f/16 range, or even wider (wider = smaller number.) Then you won't need such a high ISO.

[Vich]

For future; when shooting daylight at the beach you want to expose more for the subjects and the non-reflective water.

Use Manual Mode only. Point it at the sand / water line (not directly into the sun to avoid reflection) and get that exposed right, then you don't need to worry until the light changes.

The sky will be blown out, but that's unavoidable. It can be mitigated with a CP.

Using any auto-exposure mode (Av, Tv, P) will be fooled when you point it anywhere towards the sunlight (like your shot) and it'll have 3, 4, 5, even 6 stops difference from shot to shot.

As suggested; if the subjects are closer, use fill flash - but pointing the flash directly at the subject (or use the pop-up). For this; you need to under-expose by a stop or two to avoid over exposure from the flash. It gets a little tricky because the distance-to-subject comes into play - so if they're 30 feet off, the flash will have only mild effect (almost none for the pop-up).

Noise: Sorry; don't know the free methods - surely there are some. Maybe get a trial copy of Photoshop CS3 - it's got decent noise softare.

[coldrain]

YIKES!

Why on earth do you shoot with ISO 800 and f22??? No wonder you get such not so nice results and noise even on sunny days...

Next time, try ISO 100 or 200 and f5.6 to f8.

You really should get yourself a good book explaining exposure and camera settings...

You do not have to shoot manual, put the camera's metering to [ ], point at some mid tone (like wet sand), press the * button on the corner of your camera. This will now remember the exposure settings for the sand. Then compose the photo, and even bright sky will not mess the exposure up so badly now.

If in doubt and when you feel overloaded, just set the camera in an auto mode... that will always bring you better results than what you have gotten now with your very strange (wrong even) settings. And you will not need noise ninja to try and rescue your photos a bit either.

[bshannon]

I guess I was expecting the ISO to be adjusted automatically in Tv and Av mode. Now I know better :(

I have the books on exposure and stuff. This is the 2nd time I've had problems with ISO. Gotta remember to change that!

[coldrain]

I guess I was expecting the ISO to be adjusted automatically in Tv and Av mode. Now I know better :(

I have the books on exposure and stuff. This is the 2nd time I've had problems with ISO. Gotta remember to change that!
But what made you choose f22?

[bshannon]

But what made you choose f22?

I thought that the DOF would be deeper?

[Rooz]

I thought that the DOF would be deeper?

you're on the right track but no need to go that small in aperture. f11 would have probably worked just fine with much less diffraction.

[coldrain]

Yes, it will be deeper. But how deep does it have to be??
f22 will also make the photo very unsharp. It is best to not go past f11 or f13, because f16 and higher just will make the photos unsharp, because of the small hole the light has to pass through and an effect called difraction.

This photo was taken with f6.3, 18mm, ISO 100 and 1/160 sec.

[bshannon]

Ok, well I learned something new :) Someone said that the kit lens does best between f5 and f8? Do I just start losing sharpness after f8 then?

[coldrain]

Keep it between f5.6 and f11 and you be be good. Only use higher f numbers when the situation really needs it.

You will not lose a bot between f8 and f11. But never go high just because. It has to have a real reason. More shallow depth of field most of the times makes for more attractive photos.

[bshannon]

Keep it between f5.6 and f11 and you be be good. Only use higher f numbers when the situation really needs it.

You will not lose a bot between f8 and f11. But never go high just because. It has to have a real reason. More shallow depth of field most of the times makes for more attractive photos.

Ok, guess I can work on these pics and see what I can do with them. Next time I'll know better :)

[Gintaras]

bshannon, i am surprised you got noise, really XTi is not noisy camera at all, i shot at 800ISO and found pix fairly clean still. AV mode is best for learning and usual shooting, TV for action in my unexperienced opinion.

[bshannon]

Is it generally bad practice to have both the UV and CP filters on? I know the UV filter doesnt really do much, but it's annoying to take it off and put it back on, etc...

[coldrain]

In my opinion it is bad practice.

[bshannon]

Thx coldy :)

[Gintaras]

Ops, I did not read your settings in the shot before posting… gosh, F22, ISO 800, what for? Now that you got your explanation form other others, I can only suggest: use that.

As for filters, the more I use my camera the less I like UV and CP filters. UV is useless and can impact lens IQ, I bought Hoya UV for Sigma lens and sold altogether happily. Forget UV unless you want to protect really VERY expensive glass. And then if you need UV pick only finest quality. Same applies to CP. As for CP filter, sometimes it can be good, but not all the time. I recall once I forgot to take it off the lens in evening time, and it ruined hell many of otherwise nice photos. Since then I use CP ONLY when I feel I really need it.

Of all filters I guess there is only one I wish I have, this is GND filter, problem in my place only Cokin GND available and it is worst of the bunch, so must order better one from the States.

Coldy, great pix in your post, somehow you shooting not only flowers:p

[Gintaras]

and, bshannon, do not feel frustrated, while learning be prepared to trash 70-80% of your pix... cause i am in similar situation my rule is simple: shoot at least 5-10 pix of the same playing around with F, exposure compensation and shutter, do bracketing if in doubt... and study then pix on PC for settings which netted you best result. Remember CF memory is cheap and you can always drop shots you do not like... but taking as many pix as possible improves your chance to receive what you want. in my VERY humble opinion as I am as junior in DSLR as you. :D:eek:

[bshannon]

Thx Gintaras. I will try to do better next time. I learned my lesson :)

[Gintaras]

bshannon, you speak funny... DO YOU KNOW how many such lessons you will have in future of your DSLR life??? believe me, I have these lessons each time when i grab my cam and go shooting... BUT when i do my homework better i am rewarded with nicer results. so do NOT hesitate and shoot as much as you can. and then believe me you will start loving it like true DSLR addict!!!

One my friend DSLR addict when he saw great light for shooting, he was jumping off his office and going around. He carried his 30D with him all the time. :eek::D

[bshannon]

Ok, I tried to fix one of the pics with CS2 and Noise Ninja. Noise Ninja removed quite a bit of cloud detail...which I'm not terribly upset about, but would be nice if it didnt.

These are the results...

Original resized and saved at 10 Quality
http://www.bridgetotheweb.com/pics/RebelXT/IMG_0578_sm.jpg

PP Image resized and saved at 10 Quality
http://www.bridgetotheweb.com/pics/RebelXT/IMG_0578_PS_NI_sm.jpg

[bshannon]

No comments?

[Vich]

No comments?

Removing noise from an underexposed high-ISO image is messy. Using ISO 100 on a bright sunny day not only offers a bit more dynamic range, but you can clean up noise too. That's one thing about high ISO, you can't be under-exposing much or the image will become relatively useless as a large print/image (unless of course you think noise is a quaint look).

[bshannon]

To put it plainly, I messed up this batch of images badly with my ISO and Aperture selections. Oh well :(

[Vich]

To put it plainly, I messed up this batch of images badly with my ISO and Aperture selections. Oh well :(

No worries. ISO 800 is actually pretty usable when well exposed. Here's one of the first shots I took with my 20D 2 years back.
http://FLASHME.smugmug.com/photos/35306467-S-1.jpg
(Full here (http://FLASHME.smugmug.com/photos/35306467-O-1.jpg))
Someone commented about it being "sandy" and I kicked myself up and down over it, later realizing they were full of it and it's just fine.

In short; your exposure is the larger problem. ISO 800 contributed to it being less fixable, but isn't in itself such a bad thing. If your exposure were about 2 stops up (so, f11 but otherwise the same) - not only would the noise be easier to fix, but there would be almost none there. Weird - you can more easily fix the ones that don't need fixing.

"Sunny 16" is a great rule to memorize (did someone already mention it on this thread). I think the original was approximately: f16, ISO 100 film, 1/125 shutter.

Today's version is: Set to f16 and make the ISO the reciprocal of shutter speed (so ISO 100 for 1/100, ISO 200 for 1/200).

If you open up your f-stop by 1 (so f16 down to f11 ... I think) then speed up your shutter speed by 1 stop (or double); so 1/200 instead of 1/100.

"Sunny 16" is easier to remember than "Sunny 11" - because we weren't interested in girls when we were 11, lol. 16 should be fine with most lenses, but 11 is probably a tad better on some. I don't really understand the ramifications of using tiny aperture in bright sunlight so maybe there's some other reason for the "16".

[toriaj]

Vich, that shot is beautifully exposed! I can't believe anyone called it sandy (??) and, I can barely believe it was ISO 800 ... did you send it through NR?

[Vich]

Vich, that shot is beautifully exposed! I can't believe anyone called it sandy (??) and, I can barely believe it was ISO 800 ... did you send it through NR?
Thanks. It pretty much came from the camera that way. Used the pop-up flash using the 50 f1.8 lens on a 20D. It was in an outdoor theater at Disneyland. Mode was "Auto". I was pretty new to the camera at the time although I usually shot Av - unless using flash. The camera chose 1/160 and f5.6. I was about 4 or 5 feet away so even at f5.6 the background was well blurred.

I agree; you'd have to look pretty close to find flaws - and I'd accuse the flaw-finder as being a pixel peeping nit picker at that. 40,000 photos later, it stands as one of my best shots. I know, distance distortion has her head a tad big, the flash shadow is harsh, lighting a bit flat (albeit some nice shadows showing her baby dimples), and it's pretty center cropped, but that AUTO sure did a great job with exposing for me.

OP: Sorry 'bout the hijack.

[fionndruinne]

bshannon, I would never use quite so much noise reduction; it has destroyed the finer details. In my opinion, you shouldn't sweat the aperture; your camera has the capability to properly expose even for a comparatively wideish aperture like f/5.6, let alone the higher f-stops, and you don't really need all the depth-of-field of f/22. I've taken some shots in full bright sunlight with f/5.6 in aperture priority mode, and liked the results a lot since the shallower depth-of-field isolated my subjects.

Not wanting to tout my work, but here's (http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=34075) some oceanic photos I took recently; the important EXIF data's there if you want it. Mind, these were taken in program mode, so I didn't manually choose everything, but the key was mainly in exposure compensation, varying the values there between about -1 to +0.7 as the situation called for. When the main subject is extra bright, you can dial some + in exposure compensation, otherwise the camera will decide that your metered subject isn't actually as bright as it is, and the whole photo will look dark. Conversely, when the subject is dark (and, importantly, when the camera's light meter is reading it to get its exposure; if the camera meters something else, your alteration of EV will just send your photo haywire), set the EV to -0.3 or -0.7, sometimes lower.

I also chose ISO 400 for some shots, because it's very clean in both Nikon and Canon cameras. I picked ISO 400 only as the afternoon lengthened and the sunlight started to disappear, and when I wanted to freeze the action of the waves on the rocks.