Are DSLRs too complex for beginners

[Deleted member 49428]

I thought it was M for M.r.n

 

[MartynK]

No. Most kids can use a computer these days, and a DSLR isn't any more complex than that. You do need to learn some skills/gain experience to get the best out of them, but that's true of lots of things, and an entry level DSLR will usually give you decent 'snaps' in Auto or a scene mode. You can move on from there, or not, as you please.

 

[southernjessie]

I used a Canon Sureshot Supreme film camera (35mm f2.8) from age 17 to 33 and took it to many countries I visited. It was an easy camera to use - focus and recompose. After using a compact P&S for a few years I decided to get my first DSLR and see if I would be any good at using it. I bought a Nikon D40 from LCE for just over £100 plus the AF-S 35mm f1.8. I had been doing a lot of research before I bought these and knew that the choice of lens was probably more important than the body. I wanted to learn how to use the camera properly so visited many websites that had tutorials on the exposure triangle. I printed these out and used them as a reference. I then managed to buy an old Nikkor AI-S 24mm f2.8 lens so I could practise and experiment setting the aperture and shutter speed, plus I had to focus manually. Probably overkill for a complete beginner but I think it benefitted me in the long run.

I'm most comfortable using Manual mode on both my cameras and can set the A, SS and ISO pretty quickly. With my X-T2, from F4 most lenses are pretty sharp across the frame. With my RX1R, I have to watch the aperture a lot more closely as it has an insanely shallow DoF at wide apertures. Although many people use aperture priority, I think it's actually more important for a beginner to understand shutter speed since that ultimately decides if the image will be in focus, especially if they want to shoot pics of their kids.

I don't think so but I do think the wrong advice is usually given. The usual question is I HAVE BOUGHT/AM THINKING OF BUYING A DSLR I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW TO SET IT. The usual answer is set it on auto until you feel confident with it. My advice would be set it to manual. Why do I think this. In 1970 when I was a young lad of 17 I bought a Practica Super TL. Manual only, aperture priority didn't exist until 1972. I never had a problem with it. Learnt about shutter speeds and apertures not rocket science. This knowledge was the bedrock to how I shoot today knowing that my intelligent camera is giving me appropriate settings.

 

[Byker28i]

M for Master.

Whoa - lets not rush ahead of ourselves.... That's reserved for the DSLR manufacturer ambassadors, it's why it has a pop up message saying "are you sure" when you engage it

 

[Byker28i]

Somebodies been reading Ken Rockwell's blog

Reported - swearing on this thread. This is a family forum...


not really

 

[Eloise]

I tend to switch between P and use the "shift" function when I'm taking static subjects; and M with Auto ISO for moving subjects allow control over both aperture and shutter speed while allowing the camera to expose correctly.

Personally I find A and S less useful.

Of course I'm likely to be doing it all wrong...

 

[Phil V]

I tend to switch between P and use the "shift" function when I'm taking static subjects; and M with Auto ISO for moving subjects allow control over both aperture and shutter speed while allowing the camera to expose correctly.

Personally I find A and S less useful.

Of course I'm likely to be doing it all wrong...

M with auto ISO isn't 'Manual', in any sense but particularly in the context the OP is using.

 

[Eloise]

M with auto ISO isn't 'Manual', in any sense but particularly in the context the OP is using.

I didn't say its manual though Phil ... I said It allows full control over aperture and shutter speed. For me (and I'm not talking about anyone else but myself) I find that offers me the control I need.

Back to the op though...

The usual question is I HAVE BOUGHT/AM THINKING OF BUYING A DSLR I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW TO SET IT. The usual answer is set it on auto until you feel confident with it. My advice would be set it to manual. Why do I think this. In 1970 when I was a young lad of 17 I bought a Practica Super TL. Manual only, aperture priority didn't exist until 1972. I never had a problem with it. Learnt about shutter speeds and apertures not rocket science. This knowledge was the bedrock to how I shoot today knowing that my intelligent camera is giving me appropriate settings.

I'm curious how much people thought about exposure back then. Yes it was manual only ... but it did have TTL metering (afaik). So how much did you actually use it in "full" manual, and how much was it a case of setting either aperture or shutter to suit, and then adjusting the other to the "correct" metered value? I don't (personally though my first camera I owned rather than used was an AE-1 so had Shutter Priority) see much difference between that and using a camera in Auto mode now. Perhaps a little more you were forced to learn about using it, but you still had to go out your way to learn (through books or tuition) if you wanted to.

As an aside, I see very much that DSLRs and mirrorless ILC are actually returning to the enthusiasts (and professionals) where SLRs were prior to the digital revolution. Just a further thought.

So no, DSLRs are not too complex, but you have to be the kind of person / photographer who actually wants to learn photography; rather than the kind of person who just wants to take pictures.

 

[Byker28i]

I started with film, a cheap Fuji ST-1, which had a little meter pointer in the side of the view finder. You got the pointer in the middle for exposed correctly (or what the camera thought) and could exposure compensate by how high/low the pointer was on the scale

Taught me a lot about correctly exposing in camera.

 

[woof woof]

I've just remembered a little chat I had one day...

I was out with my Panasonic G1 and a manual film era lens when a bloke came over and started chatting to me. It soon became obvious to me that he knew next to nothing about the technicalities of stuff like aperture settings but it just didn't matter to him. He had a DSLR and a long lens and exclusively shot aviation, presumably in green square mode.

So no, DSLR's are not too complicated

 

[droj]

I'm curious how much people thought about exposure back then.

I've never had a film camera with auto modes. Whether the meter was hand-held or ttl, technique was (and is) essentially the same - you exercise judgement to do with where you point the meter and how to interpret its reading. Another influence would be the type of film - neg or transparency. So thought was involved rather than blind trust.

 

[Eloise]

I started with film, a cheap Fuji ST-1, which had a little meter pointer in the side of the view finder. You got the pointer in the middle for exposed correctly (or what the camera thought) and could exposure compensate by how high/low the pointer was on the scale

Taught me a lot about correctly exposing in camera.

The camera didn't teach you about correctly exposing though ... surely that was something you had to go out and learn for yourself though either experimentation or learning about the photography and exposure.

Same today ... stick the camera in programme mode and its like setting the pointer to the middle ... but once you have taken the photos you can see that when you point it at someone with a bright sun behind them, the camera will underexpose the person so you needed to adjust the exposure to compensate. The same today; only you can see that quickly (if you choose) looking at the back screen - and yes, if you have mirrorless you have real exposure visible through the finder ... mirrorless is wonderful and all DSLRs are dinosaurs (sorry had to put that in before someone could add it for me ) - and instantly see the effects exposure compensation (or adjustments in manual) would take.

So I would suggest modern cameras allow for learning in a more immediate way ... if the photographer is so inclined to learn.

 

[Eloise]

I've never had a film camera with auto modes. Whether the meter was hand-held or ttl, technique was (and is) essentially the same - you exercise judgement to do with where you point the meter and how to interpret its reading. Another influence would be the type of film - neg or transparency. So thought was involved rather than blind trust.

I accept that *photographers* would do this ... but thats no different today. You have to exercise judgement. Less so with modern matrix metering and the latitude of digital sensors, but there is still judgement needed over the scene if you are that kind of person. Digital has made photography more accessible, but essentially the techniques are the same (IMO).

 

[soupdragon]

I've had more dlsr cameras than I care to count and still can't take a good picture.

That said, they are a doddle to operate.

 

[Byker28i]

The camera didn't teach you about correctly exposing though ... surely that was something you had to go out and learn for yourself though either experimentation or learning about the photography and exposure.

Exactly that and I still do the same today, look at the situation and realise I need to over or under expose. You just turn a wheel now rather than watch the meter

 

[Will.B]

Unless you're very lucky and just naturally gifted, I would say you're unlikely to get very good at something if you don't understand it. Yes, you may be able to do just enough to get by, but to excel at something you really need to understand it first. That's obviously just the first step or the foundation. After that it takes more work......
But the point I really want to make is that there has never been a time when it was easier to learn something. It's not like you have to trek down to the library or buy a set of encyclopedias anymore, most people who are new to photography now have instant access to an infinite amount of learning material via the internet. Also, with digital photography, you haven't got the cost of film + developing, you can take as many bad photos as you like without worry. I'm only a typical amateur but when I first decided I wanted to take better photographs, I spent hours reading online and stumbling across the exposure triangle which led onto each of the separate aspects and their characteristics. Add to that the readily available source of inspiration from Flickr etc. to go out and try it yourself means that if someone wants to learn then they will. If they can't be bothered, well that's up to them.......But it has literally never been easier.

Yes very true and with that in mind I fell personally that is why I like to go fully manual. It is an art to me. I like to be in control. To be able to feel I have actually achieved something. It’s a validation thing as well. Which is very human. I don’t think a bad thing but a thing to be aware of and that’s where a particular rabbit hole doth descend into psychospirituality and self awareness. Which is nice. Haha.
That aside, I feel that so much in life these days has been cheapened by accessability in a respect. An anomaly of the modern age. For me it is a pursuit of creative satisfaction and all that that entails. A find a parallel in music production. Especially electronic music. Never has it been more ‘accessible’ but with that Everyman and his dog is doing it, obviously some better than others but it can be a disheartening realisation. Until you learn to detach and create for creation sake. And do the best with it you can for your own satisfaction.
To the original question. No I don’t think dslr are too complicated. If anything they just provide room to grow.

 

[Phil V]

Yes very true and with that in mind I fell personally that is why I like to go fully manual. It is an art to me. I like to be in control. To be able to feel I have actually achieved something.

Is this a joke?

There's a misconception here, a total misunderstanding of the difference between art and craft.

Having a mastery of the controls of a camera in order to achieve a well focussed, well exposed image is craft. And it's craft whether you're shooting on a completely manual camera or a modern DSLR. but the second can have a guess what you want it to (it'll not often be right), choosing how to manipulate those computers is still craft.

Art is choosing what to shoot, when and where. And no camera can ever guess at that for you.

Too many photographers spend too much time and effort working on the craft, which is sad, like a novelist practicing handwriting techniques rather than researching and creating plot concepts. A fantastic photograph shot on auto is more of an achievement than a crap photo shot in manual, just like a great novel written on a word processor.

As for the original question; no. Modern cameras aren't too complicated, they're tools with loads of helpful functions. Just like modern cars, is it great fun driving a brand new BMW M5, with loads of driver aids? Yes. Is it great fun driving a Morris Minor? Yes. Is one 'better' than the other? It all depends what you prefer personally.

Many of us would enjoy both, I can enjoy using an ancient mechanical camera, as well as a modern electronic wonder. But when it comes to 'work', I can create more images better and quicker using a modern camera, so my value judgement is 'give me the computers please'

 

[holty]

depends on the persons ability to learn !!

 

[woof woof]

There's a misconception here, a total misunderstanding of the difference between art and craft...

I mostly lurk on another site on which there are some technically very good pictures which are also IMO utterly mind numbingly boring. And people on that site rave about them, lots of "Great work" posts. I can see it but at the same time I rebel against it. I might take shots like that when I first get a lens but once I've looked at the centre and all of the corners etc I pass it for use and take pictures with it

 

[Raymond Lin]

Is this a joke?

There's a misconception here, a total misunderstanding of the difference between art and craft.

Having a mastery of the controls of a camera in order to achieve a well focussed, well exposed image is craft. And it's craft whether you're shooting on a completely manual camera or a modern DSLR. but the second can have a guess what you want it to (it'll not often be right), choosing how to manipulate those computers is still craft.

Art is choosing what to shoot, when and where. And no camera can ever guess at that for you.

Too many photographers spend too much time and effort working on the craft, which is sad, like a novelist practicing handwriting techniques rather than researching and creating plot concepts. A fantastic photograph shot on auto is more of an achievement than a crap photo shot in manual, just like a great novel written on a word processor.

As for the original question; no. Modern cameras aren't too complicated, they're tools with loads of helpful functions. Just like modern cars, is it great fun driving a brand new BMW M5, with loads of driver aids? Yes. Is it great fun driving a Morris Minor? Yes. Is one 'better' than the other? It all depends what you prefer personally.

Many of us would enjoy both, I can enjoy using an ancient mechanical camera, as well as a modern electronic wonder. But when it comes to 'work', I can create more images better and quicker using a modern camera, so my value judgement is 'give me the computers please'

I feel like there is a section of photographers who think shooting in M is the only place to be, almost look down on others who don't use it "oh you don't know how you use your camera, you can't be any good!"

Full manual has it's place, you use the best settings for the environment, let the camera help you to get the shot.

 

[Deleted member 49428]

Hmm shooting with an A6000 which is constantly lifeview with the ability to see setting effects there is no way Im gonna learn anything about exposure no matter if it in S, A, M or whatever mode. Just move the dial until things looks right, job done. It really takes dedication to take the cameras processor (matrix, evaluative etc)totally out of the equation and taping over the screen to get to the point where YOU have to do the heavy lifting and experience the cost of failure and then learn to look at the scene to evaluate if it's predominantly dark or light and by how many stops. Thank god (eh Nikon, Canon, Minolta, Pentax, Olympus...........) our cameras does such good jobs evaluative such a high number of scenes relatively correct and giving us the needed feedback instantly.

 

[woof woof]

You do know that when using a Sony or any other mirrorless camera you can turn the constant preview stuff off? And indeed you can turn just about every bit of helpful stuff that appears in the EVF off and then you'll have to do it all yourself.

 

[Deleted member 49428]

You do know that when using a Sony or any other mirrorless camera you can turn the constant preview stuff off? And indeed you can turn just about every bit of helpful stuff that appears in the EVF off and then you'll have to do it all yourself.

What? Really? Yes Im aware of that. I shoot it both with and without ocf with AF lenses and adapted ones so its become second nature to do it. Still you have to go through the menu to turn all of it off.

 

[woof woof]

What? Really? Yes Im aware of that. I shoot it both with and without ocf so its become second nature to do it. Still you have to go through the menu to turn all of it off.

I assume that anyone who wants to learn what buttons and dials do what and how it all affects the picture might be able to spare the time to dive into the menu and turn off the constant preview. After all, diving into the menu then gives you the authority to criticise it. It seems like all some people do is compare menus.

Sorry, but I just get a bit tired of the more negative aspects of forums... the points scoring, the brand snobbery, and the settings snobbery. I'm sure it must put a lot of people off.

For those who think that cameras are too complex, please don't think that. They pretty much all have modes which do most all of the technical stuff for you and if you want to learn what's going on it'll all be in the user manual. Actually I think that mirrorless cameras with their in view effects and aids are the easiest cameras to learn with.

 

[Tringa]

DSLRs aren't to complex for beginners but, for some, photography is too complex.

It is not that the basics of photography are in themselves too complex.

Photography is (or becomes) too complex for some beginners because some are not willing to put in the effort to learn the basics, and then can't understand why their photos taken on the expensive camera are rubbish. Alternatively some think the camera is so 'clever' that all they have to do is point in in more or less the right direction, press the button and it will, all by itself, produce a great result, and then can't understand why their photos etc........

Dave

 

[Deleted member 49428]

I assume that anyone who wants to learn what buttons and dials do what and how it all affects the picture might be able to spare the time to dive into the menu and turn off the constant preview. After all, diving into the menu then gives you the authority to criticise it. It seems like all some people do is compare menus.

Sorry, but I just get a bit tired of the more negative aspects of forums... the points scoring, the brand snobbery, and the settings snobbery. I'm sure it must put a lot of people off.

For those who think that cameras are too complex, please don't think that. They pretty much all have modes which do most all of the technical stuff for you and if you want to learn what's going on it'll all be in the user manual. Actually I think that mirrorless cameras with their in view effects and aids are the easiest cameras to learn with.

As such I dont disagree but there is a wast difference between being forced to work a certain way and have it as an option you can choose to adopt. Re the rest I think you lost me

 

[Fraser Euan White]

Manual mode on a DSLR is a NOVICE enthusiasts setting! How's that for a statement!

When people start in photography they will usually set their camera into full auto (P) mode and use the camera as a 'point & shoot' tool. If they take too the hobby they will learn about the exposure triangle etc, if they aren't interested in photography they won't bother with this learning. As they understand the exposure triangle they will move their camera's dial towards the M mode and think they have cracked photography!

For an enthusiast this really isn't a problem as there is no essence on speed so you can take your time 'fiddling' with the three settings.

This, is a complete waste of a modern DSLR camera though which is laden with features; a Pro photographer will completely understand his 'tool' and be able to use auto settings that massively speed up his picture taking ability so that he will have 'rattled off' 20+ frames in the time it takes the 'Novice enthusiast' in his M mode to set up one of his three settings. Being confident in how to use your cameras (tool) functions and what each one does/influences means you won't miss a vital shot.

Don't think that because you use manual mode you are experienced; you are not - every setting on a DSLR has uses in certain areas and to be competent you should know them all IMO, leaving your camera in Manual Mode because the other settings are to complicated or you don't understand them is as bad as not learning a concept such as depth of field.

The pro level cameras have more menu settings than any other - do you think these are there to help novices pick up the camera and use it?

Use the correct mode for the 'job in hand'; sometimes this may be manual but most of the time it isn't the best mode (Studio photography apart).

Personally, I feel the three most important parts of photography are:

(1) Focus - what you want to be in focus needs to be tack sharp
(2) Composition
(3) Depth of field

I have missed out the exposure triangle from the list as digital has such a wide latitude and software is that good a usable image can be obtained even if the exposure isn't that good.

If the above three are good then I maintain a reasonable photograph can be produced. The end photograph is the 'ART' the recording of it is the 'CRAFT'.

 

[Raymond Lin]

I can say my first mode I started with is Av aperture priority and I still use this 90% of the time.

I’ve never used Tv or auto or P.

 

[Fraser Euan White]

I can say my first mode I started with is Av aperture priority and I still use this 90% of the time.

I’ve never used Tv or auto or P.

Av (Aperture priority) is an Auto mode.

 

[Raymond Lin]

Av (Aperture priority) is an Auto mode.

semi auto, as I am changing 1 part of the triangle, actually I set my own ISO too. so 2 of 3.

But if you want to call it Auto mode, label me what you want.

I shoot manual when it is best to.

 

[Professor1991]

I have to say it did take me some time before I managed to get my head around everything. In relation to learning, it's relative to the individual and their capacity to learn and want to learn.

What helped me was having a Nokia Lumia 1020. I never used it as a phone but it's camera was sublime, especially compared to mobile standards around that time. It had an app which allowed me to change Shutter speed and ISO (Phones have fixed apertures). I quite liked leaning using this. It gave me a feel for manual camera controls. It's large resolution for a camera was quite interesting as well.

Modes like Aperture & Shutter Priority modes are also excellent stepping stones. Whenever I was out with my kit lens, I used to shoot in Aperture Priority mode at F8 constantly as that was when my lens was at its sharpest so the only thing I worried was composing the shot. Shutter Priority is also excellent as I was out recently and my friends were playing on a beach with the sand and I wanted to freeze sand flying so I used it in Shutter Priority and fired away, thankfully it was sunny so I could get a fast enough shutter speed.

In terms of the way I shoot, it varies. More often than not, when I'm attempting to test myself or my lens, I'll shoot in manual so I get used to it but also may be the camera is making a mistake so I can always rule that out. I quite like shooting buses so when I'm out doing that, I tend to either shoot in auto (Without flash) or in manual. Whenever I shoot buses, their stationary and the light is almost always good and I find auto makes a good enough decision considering the use of the photos. I only override and shoot in manual whenever I see elements underexposed. Whenever I go out shooting to some nice locations with friends, I'll always attempt to shoot in manual capturing both Jpeg & RAW files. I capture jpegs because I can easily transfer them to my phone so I can send to others as I tend to get round to editing the RAW files some time later on.

1 thing I will say is, that their seems to be a view that anyone who shoots in auto or any of the priority modes isn't a proper photographer or knows very little on how they work. The same also applies to anyone who doesn't shoot in RAW. When I first got into understanding elements of photography (Aperture, shutter speed, iso etc....), I went head first into it and I was told, always shoot in RAW, even if you weren't going to edit after !! I used to shoot in jpeg first as I didn't know how to edit plus it was easier in terms of transferring photos to my phone but I've slowly learned over time. To an extent, the same also applies to those who brag about gear.
One thing I quite like about this forum is the maturity. I remember I created a thread a while about auto mode and many photographers mentioned using it and no one really said your any less of a photographer because of it.

All modes have their uses. Even FF DSLRs have auto modes. One thing I will say is that, manual modes open up a whole new field of creativity.

 

[Fraser Euan White]

If the camera selects one of the three settings automatically then it is an auto mode.

 

[nandbytes]

I'd also call that semi-automatic

 

[Fraser Euan White]

I have to say it did take me some time before I managed to get my head around everything. In relation to learning, it's relative to the individual and their capacity to learn and want to learn.

In terms of the way I shoot, it varies. More often than not, when I'm attempting to test myself or my lens, I'll shoot in manual so I get used to it but also may be the camera is making a mistake so I can always rule that out. I quite like shooting buses so when I'm out doing that, I tend to either shoot in auto (Without flash) or in manual. Whenever I shoot buses, their stationary and the light is almost always good and I find auto makes a good enough decision considering the use of the photos. I only override and shoot in manual whenever I see elements underexposed. .

The camera does not make any mistakes; it is always user error The meters on modern cameras are superb but can still get 'fooled' by complex lighting. Instead of going to manual mode and 'messing around' with different settings use the bracketing feature on your camera. If the cameras drive mode is set to continuous high (IMO should always be shot in this mode for bursts) then you can take multiple pictures with different exposures in a second.

 

[Fraser Euan White]

I'd also call that semi-automatic

Then what is the difference between semi-auto, auto & program?

In film cameras it was always auto if the camera selected one of the settings.

All the camera manufacturers in their instruction manuals referred to it as either aperture priority auto or shutter priority auto - no mention of semi-auto!

My Nikon DSLR manual still refers to it as exactly the same

 

[soupdragon]

semi auto, as I am changing 1 part of the triangle, actually I set my own ISO too. so 2 of 3.

But if you want to call it Auto mode, label me what you want.

I shoot manual when it is best to.

I am so envious.
You really appear to know your stuff.
Kudos.

 

[dinorock]

M for Master.

of course just as a is for amateur there is nothing wrong with shooting in any of the settings if you only needed m on a pro camera the rest would not be there

 

[Raymond Lin]

of course just as a is for amateur there is nothing wrong with shooting in any of the settings if you only needed m on a pro camera the rest would not be there

I’m kidding with the M for master comment

 

[Raymond Lin]

If the camera selects one of the three settings automatically then it is an auto mode.

But I am setting 2 of the 3 settings, do I not get any credit?

 

[Tilz]

I'm fairly new all this myself having only had my camera for a couple of months. I have a Canon 1100D and I very rarely have it set on full auto. It never seems too give me the end results I want. I tend to have it set on aperture priority so I can control the DoF and switch to shutter priority if I'm shooting something that is moving or is likely to move. I adjust the ISO myself depending on light levels as if I leave it on auto the camera tends to pick on that's too high.
I am currently reading the dummies guide for my camera which I have found really useful. I have learnt a lot about how the camera works in different modes and how different settings effect the final image.
I tried manual when I first got my camera but didn't really know what I was doing so switched to aperture priority to get better results. When I've got to grips with all the different settings on my camera and how they affect the final image I'll give manual another go though