Upgrading my camera. I want to shoot like this >

[lukiwooki]

Thanks! I'm learning something new here. I haven't really got to study my camera yet, so thanks for this new info. So that means, the lower the f-number, the greater the depth of field. The greater the focal length (mm), the wider the photo, is that correct?

So, is there any autofocus lens for D40 with f1.2 as well as a "longer telephoto"

Anyway, does telephoto mean the wideness of the photo?

[dcclark]

Originally Posted by lukiwooki

Thanks! I'm learning something new here. I haven't really got to study my camera yet, so thanks for this new info. So that means, the lower the f-number, the greater the depth of field. The greater the focal length (mm), the wider the photo, is that correct?

So, is there any autofocus lens for D40 with f1.2 as well as a "longer telephoto"

Anyway, does telephoto mean the wideness of the photo?

The lower the f/number (taken as a fraction), the bigger the DOF. For example, f/10 will have more DOF than f/4, which will have more DOF than f/1.8 (because 1/10 is smaller than 1/4 is smaller than 1/1.8).

The shorter the focal length (in mm), the wider the photo. A 10mm lens will be ultrawide, 18mm will be wide, 35mm will be "normal" (on a DX or Crop camera), 55mm will be telephoto, etc. "Telephoto" basically means "long" (closer, zoomed in). "Wide angle" means what you think -- a very wide angle of view.

I don't think that there's an AF-S f/1.2 lens out from Nikon, but I would never get it anyhow. It would be all but impossible to take a photo with the right thing in focus! At f/1.2, the DOF is so tiny that even the smallest focus error will totally mess up your photo. The D40 just doesn't have a clear enough focusing screen to let you do such a thing -- never mind that you've never used a lens with such a huge aperture before.

The 35mm f/1.8 is a good start (and a bit more forgiving on the focusing front).

[lukiwooki]

hey thanks!
So this lens Nikon 55-200mm VR
AF-S f/4-5.6G It's not a wide angle lense right but rather a telephoto lens correct?

[dcclark]

It's a telephoto zoom. 55mm is fairly telephoto, 200 is very telephoto, so its range covers a telephoto range.

For contrast, the 18-200 is a zoom which goes from wide angle (18) through telephoto (200).

[ravncat]

you can do something like this with what you have.

There is a technique to do this without a fast wide angle...

They look similar to the brenizer technique

The Brenizer Method Explained With Directions » Bui Photography – San Francisco & Bay Area Artistic Wedding Photography

[AnimalGurl]

Your post makes me think of a great quote I read recently and remind myself of constantly when I get camera or lens envy --

"Great photography is a matter of PRACTICE, not PURCHASE."

Look at some of the great pix examples of people who took amazing shots with cell phone cameras as an example. I would say get to know all the things you can do with the camera you have...with the settings and adjustments...and I bet you can take pix you will love as much as the ones on that blog.

JMHO of course.

[LeeR]

Before you spend a dime on new equipment I would encourage you to look at these images a long time and see what makes them special. Then ask yourself this question: Can I duplicate that? I suspect you will find that much of what he is doing could have been duplicated with a good point and shoot.For instance, look at the first series of images. The photographer has chosen an overcast day and allowed very few colors into the images. He has even desaturated most of the colors in PP...except for the girls dress. That's brilliant! It focuses our attention exactly where he wants it in a very subtle and effective way. He also likes to make the images look as much like snapshots as possible, theough they are very well composed. Look at the image where they are leaning against the walking bridge. The gently curving line of the bridge is a strong compositional element that is broken by the couiple, thereby bringing attention to them. Can you do these things? Absolutely, Will you need new equipment to do them? Nope. Invesing time in studying these images and will bring you a lot closer to getting similar shots than spending money on new lenses.

[lukiwooki]

Originally Posted by ravncat

you can do something like this with what you have.

There is a technique to do this without a fast wide angle...

They look similar to the brenizer technique

The Brenizer Method Explained With Directions » Bui Photography – San Francisco & Bay Area Artistic Wedding Photography

Hey that's cool Thanks!

[lukiwooki]

Hi! Thank you all for your inspiring quotes While I totally agree, I think even if I learn the different settings of my current camera, how exposure, iso, shutter speed, aperture etc works, at the end of the day I still won't be able to shoot like my examples above because of the limitation of my equipment. I just won't be able to get the same effect.

But I think you're right, I need to know my camera first before moving up to higher end cameras. I mean, what is it for if you don't know how to use it properly, right :P and that's what i'm doing now.

Cheers!