Jumped to SLR too soon?

[Hans Voralberg]

Dont have to be 4Gb, depends on how much you shoot per session, a 4Gb card will hold ~ 300 Canon raw file

[Howard]

Yeah it's just a matter of practice makes perfect really, when I first got mine it was luck of the draw whether I got a decent pic or not, now that I've learnt the techniques I know how to manipulate the camera so that it produces the goods

[Elmo]

as people have already said, practice makes perfect. You can't expect to pick up an SLR - having never really used one before - and think you're going to get fabulous photos. With SLR there's so much more you need to think about to get the photo as you want it, that's the whole point of having an SLR. Because of the amount of functionality in the camera, you need to set each individual setting according to the situation. This will change from venue to venue, and day to day, even, if you're outside, lighting conditions will change as the day goes on.

All I can say is learn the techniques, do your research, and practice! There's so many photography guides out there, i'm sure you'll find something that'll help you with what it is you're trying to do.

[Bobster]

Hope i wont dissapoint you too much but the 18-55 is a very weak lens, may be even worse than some high-end compact.

u think so? i think its good enough for publishing

[MaddAussie]

BTW yyou may find RAW a bit slow if you are shooting motorsport on the 400D as it will fill the buffer quick as

[dancingmatt]

as people have already said, practice makes perfect. You can't expect to pick up an SLR - having never really used one before - and think you're going to get fabulous photos.

Have to say I slightly disagree with this bit of Elmo's post (although totally concur with the rest of it) - the first photos I took with a Canon 350D here at work were on Auto then Av and I was thrilled with most of them (had to crash learn how to operate it before going to a client event as photographer - and it went pretty well which I put as much down to the camera as me, if not more!)

As I then fiddled with the settings, I now pretty much live in Av and use Tv and M. Never gone back to Auto! But it showed me I could take some great pics and the quality of the Canon 350D with bundled 18-55 kit lens is so much better than any other non-SLR camera I had tried until then, that it actually grabbed me as a new hobby and I bought my own stuff with my own money.

So chriswood_7, my point is stick with it - I think the kit lens you've got will do you well, people complain about it but I've been thrilled with many pictures taken with it.

When using the telephoto, remember the reciprocal rule (focal length of 300mm needs 1/300th shutter speed or faster, focal length 100mm needs at least 1/100th speed etc) - I struggle to hold my Sigma APO DG 70-300mm still too.

Admittedly, regardless of either lens I have got many pictures that are not as sharp as I hoped. I presumed that it was my fault but I'm reading a lot of mentions that you need to do some post-sharpening with dSLRs. I say stop worrying, you've bought great kit that you can take great pictures with, get practicing!

DM

[IBM]

My first SLR was a Canon 10D, coupled with a fairly poor Sigma 28-200 3.5-5.6. This was after having a Fuji Finepix SLRalike, then a Sony DSC something or other.

The pictures in anything other than great light were terrible. Blurred to buggery 'cause I hadn't learnt to appreciate the value of good lighting conditions. The Zeiss glass on the Sony had lulled me into a false sense of security, and it wasn't until I moved up to SLR that I realised good fast glass means a lot.

BBBBBUUUUUUTTTTTT, the photos themselves, blurring aside, quickly improved, alowing me so much more control over the elements within the picture. Then I got a couple of cheapish primes, and things really improved. I'd never go back.