# Been playing with the camera...



## aaronnorth

well i thought i would have a mess around with the camera settings and i tooks some decent pics (for me).
























i added an algae tablet and the whole colony of shrimps come out! Counted about 28:




Blue tint:





camera is a olympus camedia c-350 (3.2 megapixels) so nothing special so i dont think these are bad for a first time effort


----------



## Mark Evans

i can see you holding the camera in the last photo. try shutting the curtains.

all in all there good mate. i'd watch for the white balance setting. it's in threre somewhere


----------



## aaronnorth

i know, i was just trying it to see the effect it had. What does the white balance do? What is the symbol would make it easier.


----------



## Mark Evans

basicly white balance determines the colour temprature of any photo. usualy most cameras have auto white balance, but sometimes if you set it manualy you often forget to change it.
 with out going in to the science it all to do with the kelvin rule

1000-2000 K  Candlelight 
2500-3500 K  Tungsten Bulb (household variety) 
3000-4000 K  Sunrise/Sunset (clear sky) 
4000-5000 K  Fluorescent Lamps 
5000-5500 K  Electronic Flash 
5000-6500 K  Daylight with Clear Sky (sun overhead) 
6500-8000 K  Moderately Overcast Sky 
9000-10000 K  Shade or Heavily Overcast Sky 

on most cameras you have some of the above.
you'll see WB within your camera settings somewhere. now for photographing aquariums, this is the most trickiest for the camera depending on what lamp you use. because of the florescent lamps( hence RAW shooting    ) really confuses cameras. just out of interest photographing bluebells is a frikin nightmare. even with manual selection.
you probably dont have raw. but dont worry.

depending on what image editing software you have you can adjust or even get the program to auto colour (photoshop) often looks average IMO.

do experiment, but remeber when shooting jpeg, you'll be stuck with the colour temp.so try and remember white balance selection.


----------



## aaronnorth

i have on the WB settings:

auto
a sun symbol
a cloud symbol
a lightbulb symbol
a rectangle with lines around the edge symbol (nice last description!)

Also just found out how to do B&W shots, it adds a different touch all together.


----------



## JamesM

Sun, shade, tungsten & fluorescent. 

Try the later two...


----------



## Mark Evans

aaronnorth said:
			
		

> a rectangle with lines around the edge symbol (nice last description!)



flurescent, spelt wrong


----------



## LondonDragon

Nice captures, I had a 3.2 MP from Fuji that took great macros, look out for the "flower" sign, enable thhat for close up shots. You can also use the flash, just tape a litle piece of white printer paper to cover it to act as a diffusor, try that too


----------



## aaronnorth

thanks, i had the macro turned on, i will try that trick LD


----------



## aaronnorth

I have took some more, but not of fish, i put some white paper over the flash Paulo, or did you mean the 'glossy' paper?

A toy tractor, i stood it on some paper with a paper background, i also used the table as a tripod




This is a flower my mum has, 




A silver teddy clock we have with an artistic touch   




And while i was walking past the sink i noticed a blue cup and tried Paulo's trick lol   Hope you dont mind!


----------



## LondonDragon

aaronnorth said:
			
		

> I have took some more, but not of fish, i put some white paper over the flash Paulo, or did you mean the 'glossy' paper?
> 
> .................
> 
> And while i was walking past the sink i noticed a blue cup and tried Paulo's trick lol   Hope you dont mind!



Just normal printer paper, increase the layers if you still getting too much light, or play with your camera manual settings, increasing/reducing aperture, that will give you lower/higher light levels too. When using the flash don't use high ISO levels that will just create too much grain on compact cameras, ISO 100 will be fine.

Cup trick!! Will sue you for that


----------



## aaronnorth

Doubt i can change the ISO or aperture, if i can what will it look like? If it actually says ISO or f/ then i cant - or i cant find it lol.

can you go into greater depth on these or is there any articles?


----------



## LondonDragon

aaronnorth said:
			
		

> Doubt i can change the ISO or aperture, if i can what will it look like? If it actually says ISO or f/ then i cant - or i cant find it lol.
> can you go into greater depth on these or is there any articles?


Which camera have you got? I did look at the properties of the photos posted but you must edit them on something software that removes the Exif data!


----------



## aaronnorth

camera is a olympus camedia c-350 

Resolution 3.2 Megapixel 
Colour Support Colour 
Optical Sensor Type CCD 
Total Pixels 3,300,000 pixels 
Effective Sensor Resolution 3,200,000 pixels 
Optical Sensor Size 1/2.5" 
Light Sensitivity ISO 400, ISO 64 
Digital Zoom 3.3 x 
Shooting Modes Panorama mode, frame movie mode 
Shooting Programs Landscape, portrait mode, self-portrait, night scene 
Special Effects Black & White, Sepia 
Max Shutter Speed 1/1000 sec 
Min Shutter Speed 2 sec 
Exposure Metering Spot, matrix 
Exposure Modes Programme, automatic 
Exposure Compensation Â±2 EV range, in 1/2 EV steps 
White Balance Automatic, presets 
White Balance Presets Fluorescent, sunlight, tungsten light, overcast 
Digital Video Format QuickTime 
Still Image Format JPEG 
Continuous Shooting Speed 1.5 frames per second 
Video Capture QuickTime - 320 x 240 - 15 fps - 48 sec - with 16MB card
QuickTime - 160 x 120 - 15 fps - 211 sec - with 16MB card 

Type Zoom lens - 5.8 mm - 17.4 mm - f/3.1-5.2 
Focal Length 5.8 mm - 17.4 mm 
Focal Length Equivalent to 35mm Camera 35 - 105mm 
Focus Adjustment Automatic 
Auto Focus TTL contrast detection 
Min Focus Range 50 cm 
Macro Focus Range 20-50cm 
Lens Aperture F/3.1-5.2 
Optical Zoom 3 x 
Zoom Adjustment Motorised drive 
Lens Construction 3 group(s) / 5 element(s) 
Features Aspherical lens 


Dont know whther you need any of that!?


----------



## LondonDragon

Hi Aaron, with that camera there isn't much more you can do to get better photos, what you have already is about the best you can get out of that, don't think you can do any manual settings on that model, just see if there is a macro button (flower icon) to take close up photos, other than that, just keep doing what you done so far.


----------



## aaronnorth

Didnt think so, i used the macro

The camera is about 5yr old now technology has come a long way since then and the pice for a decent camera would of bee massive, this was Â£200 when it came out   

While in Portugal, there was a mag - 'which digital camera' - there was a lens for Â£9000! It had some interesting stuff in.


----------



## LondonDragon

aaronnorth said:
			
		

> While in Portugal, there was a mag - 'which digital camera' - there was a lens for Â£9000! It had some interesting stuff in.


Yep there are very very good lenses but they do cost a fortune. The one I want for my camera costs about Â£700. Have to wait and see. Thinking of selling my Konica-Minolta kit and move to Canon or Nikon, as I have friends that have those brands and would be able to borrow kit from them too, and test things before I buy.

Thinking either the Canon 40d or the Nikon D200


----------



## aaronnorth

According to the magazine canon looked the best, it also got the best rating.

Is it the EOS range? the 450d scored well.


----------



## aaronnorth

I forgot to ask, when i put the paper over the flash, i put it so it was touching it, did you mean that or did you mean hold it further away?


----------



## ceg4048

ebay special Nikon D40 http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Nikon-D40-Body-On ... dZViewItem

Or buy the kit brand new from jessups http://www.jessops.com/Store/s47076/0/D ... lse&comp=n

Cheers,


----------



## ceg4048

aaronnorth said:
			
		

> According to the magazine canon looked the best, it also got the best rating.
> 
> Is it the EOS range? the 450d scored well.



Just noticed this and virtually fell off my chair. This is like saying that beef got a better rating than lamb, or that Picaso is rated higher than Da Vinci. The two eyeballs and their associated brain cells located in between them, peering through the viewfinder are what matter the most. The camera hardly matters. It's job is to get out of your way and to allow you to get the image you want seamlessly. The difference therefore between two or three competing brands is based on how well each accomplishes the various tasks. How is the menu structure? How easy is it to find what you want and to change what you want? How does it feel in your hand?  Where do your fingers fall naturally when holding it? Is it heavy or light? Does it have features you'll actually use?

What does best actually mean? Different cameras do different things better. What is it that you are looking for in a camera and what type of things are you going to photograph? You would get a much better idea if you spent some time in a camera shop actually holding some samples in your hand and having the guy in the shop demonstrate the virtues of each within a given price range than trusting some magazine. it's unlikely that you can tell the difference between two cameras of the same class by looking at sample photos, that's for sure. Ideally, it would be better to actually rent or borrow a few different SLR models each for a week or so before making a choice.

Here are 4 photographs each taken with a different model Nikon SLR. There are technological differences between them such as megapixels, sharpness, IOS capability, color rendition and so forth, but mostly the differences are what buttons one has to push to get the shot and how easy it is to change or correct settings gone wrong. It's impossible to tell the difference from the final product though, and these pics could easily have been taken by any equivalent Canon. The cameras used were D200, D40, D70s and D3.

But which image was taken by which camera? It's impossible to tell without the exif data. The subject, it's composition, lens choice and post processing has more to do with the final image than the camera itself at this level. You would need to make 40 inch wide prints to start seeing camera differences in the images.
























Cheers,


----------



## aaronnorth

They rated them from what i can remember on:

price
how wide the range of settings were, e.g. ISO 50 - 400
quality
how easy to use
lens supplied with the camera

and lots more. I know where you are coming from but if they use the same rating system for each camera it would come out a bit of a fair test - everybody is different though.


----------



## ceg4048

aaronnorth said:
			
		

> ... if they use the same rating system for each camera it would come out a bit of a fair test - everybody is different though.


Exactly.  It's too bad they can't rate the raters...  

Cheers,


----------

