EBMCS03

Hummm 1/250 its still quite bright... what if you tried about 1/400ish lowering the high Aperature to maybe F10. Or even keeping it up in the F13/14 area.

Ya and why ISO 400? thats too much... High ISO in digicams arnt that good... Not sure about the Rebel tho... but usually it Makes the pics too grainy... I never go above 100 even at night. I rather use a longer shutter speed w/ tripod instead.

P.S. I'm no pro but I experiemnt around a lot.
[/quote]

. . . and a remote or timer, right? ISO 400 on a Rebel is very well an untrained eye because it has a bigger mirror (CMOS) than most camera. Thanks Donv, I'll try to post the mini Me of my 545i.
[/quote]

Yes, Usually remote. I dont like to wait for the timer. if not then it still blurry because of the "click" of the sutter button.

Ya? 400 is very good on the Rebel?? I want one!!

znod

Oh and I'm still using a cheap 17" CRT monitor.
[/quote]Exposure times/shutter speeds were 1/250 sec; F-stops were f13 or f14; and ISO was 400--with minor exceptions.
[/quote]

Outdoor shots like that should only need iso 100 to 200 max. 400+ is only for dusk to night shots and increases granularity (sp).
[/quote]
The camera was set on auto mode. So, what it saw is what we got.

UUronL

Oh and I'm still using a cheap 17" CRT monitor.
[/quote]Exposure times/shutter speeds were 1/250 sec; F-stops were f13 or f14; and ISO was 400--with minor exceptions.
[/quote]

Outdoor shots like that should only need iso 100 to 200 max. 400+ is only for dusk to night shots and increases granularity (sp).
[/quote]
The camera was set on auto mode. So, what it saw is what we got.
[/quote]


I'm sure ISO400 was fine - noise is a function of the lack of light, not the increase in gain on the sensor. There was plenty of light. I'll occasionally use ISO400 in bright sunlight to get a higher flash sync speed.

400 is generally very clean on DSLRs - my D70 at 400 is about the same as it is at 200 (the lowest on that camera). I took this handheld at ISO 400, and it was dark - a situation that -should- cause noise.

znod

I'm sure ISO400 was fine - noise is a function of the lack of light, not the increase in gain on the sensor. There was plenty of light. I'll occasionally use ISO400 in bright sunlight to get a higher flash sync speed.

400 is generally very clean on DSLRs - my D70 at 400 is about the same as it is at 200 (the lowest on that camera). I took this handheld at ISO 400, and it was dark - a situation that -should- cause noise.
[/quote]
Thanks. That's pretty much what my wife said about ISO 400. She thinks that 400 could have been a problem with film, but not with digital. Your photo is very nice.

UUronL

I'm sure ISO400 was fine - noise is a function of the lack of light, not the increase in gain on the sensor. There was plenty of light. I'll occasionally use ISO400 in bright sunlight to get a higher flash sync speed.

400 is generally very clean on DSLRs - my D70 at 400 is about the same as it is at 200 (the lowest on that camera). I took this handheld at ISO 400, and it was dark - a situation that -should- cause noise.
[/quote]
Thanks. That's pretty much what my wife said about ISO 400. She thinks that 400 could have been a problem with film, but not with digital. Your photo is very nice.
[/quote]


Thanks. Do you guys work much in RAW? I've also recently been enjoying this book... it's the rage in photo circles these days:

Centurion

What the? Handheld?
How long was the shutter open? 1/30th is my guess and you must have three hands.

Bimmer32

[quote=donv' date='Oct 30 2005, 11:04 PM]
[quote name='Bimmer32' date='Oct 30 2005, 09:41 PM']That's what is so good about the Rebel. www.dpreview.com is very informative for those who are looking to buy a digital camera because it tells you the whole story behind digital process versus 35 mm and more.

Thank you for the tips on posting pics. Maybe now I'll post more fun stuff.

UUronL

What the? Handheld?
How long was the shutter open? 1/30th is my guess and you must have three hands.
[/quote]


Yup 1/30th. I just meant the darkness of the scene would be a source of noise. The dark patches and shadows - you see noise in those areas even with the camera set to its lowest ISO setting.

znod

I'm sure ISO400 was fine - noise is a function of the lack of light, not the increase in gain on the sensor. There was plenty of light. I'll occasionally use ISO400 in bright sunlight to get a higher flash sync speed.

400 is generally very clean on DSLRs - my D70 at 400 is about the same as it is at 200 (the lowest on that camera). I took this handheld at ISO 400, and it was dark - a situation that -should- cause noise.
[/quote]
Thanks. That's pretty much what my wife said about ISO 400. She thinks that 400 could have been a problem with film, but not with digital. Your photo is very nice.
[/quote]

Thanks. Do you guys work much in RAW? I've also recently been enjoying this book... it's the rage in photo circles these days:


[/quote]
My wife just received her [our ~{;^)] camera last Friday, but no RAW yet. Her agenda for today includes beginning to learn about RAW. I will let her know about the book. Thanks much for the info. Rah RAW!

Centurion

From my experience, if I know I'm going to be shooting only a few pictures (and they have to be stationary, opposed to moving objects), I'll use RAW. I've found it the best for post processing, but boy does it take up space.