# Canon 350D



## aaronnorth (12 May 2010)

Hi all,

it's about time I invested in a better camera, the fuji S5700 was great, but I felt it held me back in places, so I purchased a second hand 350D.
It come with a 18-55mm canon lens and a spare battery for Â£240 and is like new, no scratches or marks  

My Uncle then gave me two sigma lenses (70-210mm macro & 25-70mm), flashgun, remote shutter and a couple of memory cards so I'm all set.   

I havent tried any aquatic photography yet but first impressions are great. There is hardly any noise at ISO1600 which is about the same as ISO400 on the Fuji.   
Quick start-up and very easy to take pictures  

Here is one of 'Harry' the Guinea Pig,



Cant wait to get out and take some outdoors when I have the time!

Thanks, Aaron


----------



## George Farmer (12 May 2010)

Congrats, Aaron!  Nice set-up you got there.

Graeme Edwards still uses a 350D and he's one of the best photographers on here.

Great shot of the guinea pig too!


----------



## Mark Evans (12 May 2010)

welcome to the canon club mate


----------



## Graeme Edwards (12 May 2010)

Good luck with it Aaron, it will do you proud.

You will have to work a little harder at taking pics compared to the higher end camera folks. Having said that, it will teach you to work with what you have got. Ive found with mine that the lens it curtail. The standard kit lens is rubbish. Make sure you use a tripod as much as you can, cranking up the ISO to get the shot leaves you disappointed with the clarity.
When shooting in AV, i have found with mine, that nocking the exposure down by at least one stop results in a better exposure. 
Oh, and get your self a polarizing filter, the camera cant cope with wet looking/shiny objects.....

Heres my flicker if you want to see what I have done.....

http://www.flickr.com/photos/g-edwards/


----------



## Mark Evans (13 May 2010)

Graeme Edwards said:
			
		

> When shooting in AV, i have found with mine, that nocking the exposure down by at least one stop results in a better exposure.



 i've found recently, adjusting the LCD monitor to no.3 is a good average for the correct exposure. maybe it might work on the 350D anything above gives a false reading.don't rely on the LCD for exposure. you should be viewing the histogram for that.

that said, i do often shoot with under exposing in mind.


----------



## George Farmer (13 May 2010)

Graeme Edwards said:
			
		

> When shooting in AV, i have found with mine, that nocking the exposure down by at least one stop results in a better exposure.


That technique may give very different results depending on the metering mode i.e. spot vs. evaluative.

I'm not sure if the 350D has 'blinkies' (flashing parts of blown out/overexposed areas) on the LCD monitor.

I use that a lot, and the histogram.

I understand why a lot deliberately underexpose but I try to get exposure bang-on to get the most detail from the shadows.  It's a balancing act with not blowing highlights too, of course.  

With a cropped sensor we need all the help we can get with the dynamic range compared to the full-frame guys...


----------



## Dave Spencer (13 May 2010)

Bear in mind, Aaron, there is no such thing as a bad histogram. Here is an example from a photography web site. Some of the best photos occur with the camera to your eye, and the shutter button under your index finger, and nothing else.










Dave.


----------



## murph (13 May 2010)

Well done chooseing a canon! My weapon of choice.

I've used the 40d and 5d extensively and to be honest still get blown away by images taken by so called 'lower end' cameras. It's not what you've got it's what you do with it that counts.

I'll second the thoughs on ditching the kit lens in favour of better glass with a constant aperture through the zoom range.

Just remember that as it is a cropped sensor you effectivley multiply your zoom by the sensor size. I think this is 1.6 for canons. So in practice a 10mm lens is really 16mm and so on.

I'll maybe post my flickr page later as it's mostly canon shots.


Looking forward to seeing the shots.


----------



## paul.in.kendal (13 May 2010)

I'm moving from a Fuji bridge camera to a Canon too, Aaron - good choice! Lovely guinea pig, BTW.



			
				George Farmer said:
			
		

> I'm not sure if the 350D has 'blinkies' (flashing parts of blown out/overexposed areas) on the LCD monitor.



Ooh, ooh, just looked up blinkies (properly 'Highlight Alert') - sounds like a great tool!  I can't wait for my 500D to turn up!



			
				Murph said:
			
		

> I've used the 40d and 5d extensively and to be honest still get blown away by images taken by so called 'lower end' cameras. It's not what you've got it's what you do with it that counts.


I'd second that.  If something amazing happens in front of you and you've not got a camera - any camera - to hand, you've had it.  I ALWAYS have a camera with me - one day I might just get the shot of a lifetime.  I wonder what Cartier-Bresson would have improved on with modern kit? Nothing, probably...


----------



## oldwhitewood (13 May 2010)

paul.in.kendal said:
			
		

> I'm moving from a Fuji bridge camera to a Canon too, Aaron - good choice! Lovely guinea pig, BTW.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Good point I don't know how Cartier-Bresson's work could possibly be improved.


----------



## murph (13 May 2010)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/12589183@N06/

my stream, forgive all the dodgy tank photos i just had to upload them somewhere to get them on the forum!


----------



## aaronnorth (14 May 2010)

Thanks for all the responses guys, it was Between the 350D and nikon D40.
I was looking atboth Graeme's and Dave's work but after Reading something about the D40 Needing AF-S lenses i decided it would be easier to go with the canon.

I have never used the histogram before and I have just gone by the LCD so it looks like I need to start using it more. 

I forgot to mention I have both UV and PF filters, do you shoot with one on constantly , or in some cases is it best to have none? because so far I have always used one.

I'll head over to flickr now and take a look 
Thanks, Aaron


----------



## aaronnorth (14 May 2010)

Thanks for all the responses  

It was between the Nikon D40 & 350D as I was looking at Dave's & Graeme's photostreams. I went with the Canon in the end after reading about the D40 needing AF-S lenses due a lack of motor in the body or something, so I thought it would be better to go with the Canon.
I have got some UV & PF filters, and I have been shooting with one on all the time, (the Guinea was taken with a PF), when is the right time to shoot with none? Or is it best to always use one?

I have never used the histograms before, just gone off the LCD as mentioned above, so it looks like I need to start using it  



> I'll second the thoughs on ditching the kit lens in favour of better glass with a constant aperture through the zoom range.



I always hear people talking about better glass, how do you know it is better? Do they have a specific name or do you mean the settings available such as f/ and focal range?. The only ones I know of are the L-series? by Canon which are meant to be the best. Apart from that I cant see any difference lol.

I'll head over to Flickr now  

Thanks, Aaron


----------



## murph (14 May 2010)

Canons L series lenses are their top of the range....well range!


Basically the lower the aperture number the wider the aperture and the faster the lens. Hence why it's known as fast glass. Typically the prime lenses, fixed focal length, offer better optic quality and wider apertures and, of course, more expense!

Personally i don't see a UV filter isn't of any real benefit and can actually be detrimental, more chance of lens flare and can give a pinky tinge. It can protect the front element of your lens from damage and alot of people use it for this purpose.

A poleriser is mainly used to saturate a blue sky, make clouds 'pop', remove reflections from shiny surfaces and water and can saturate colours. I've seen it being used in portrait photography to give a more 'sheer' look to skin. It also cuts down the light entering the lens by about 1 stop so not a good idea in low light situations. A polarizer has to be adjusted by being rotated and works best at 90 degrees to the sun.

I find photography is one of the few things in life where you genuinly get what you pay for and in my experiance it's often worth investing in what you can afford. 

That being said my fav lens is actually the canon 50mm 1.8, cheap as chips! I find it a little fuzzy at 1.8 but stopped down to 2.2/2.8 becomes razor sharp. You can also buy close up filters that my not be the best in optical quality but can be good for cheap macro shots.


----------



## aaronnorth (14 May 2010)

murph said:
			
		

> Canons L series lenses are their top of the range....well range!
> 
> 
> Basically the lower the aperture number the wider the aperture and the faster the lens. Hence why it's known as fast glass. Typically the prime lenses, fixed focal length offer better optic quality and larger apertures and more expense!
> ...



Thanks for the info  I've been looking into getting a large aperture lens and that Canon one is perfect  
I think I'll do some test shots tomorrow, although I need to do a final clean up & photograph the tank for IAPLC   lol

Thankyou, Aaron


----------

