2.8 is too big sometimes

[Mike IN]

I have shot for years, and recently made the jump to digital. I never had the budget for a fast lens and recently bought a tamron 17-50 2,8 for my canon t1i. I find the Tamron sharp and awesome. my problem is my wife sometimes shoots with my camera (scary i know) she has always been okay with the faithful auto green rectangle on all the canons i have had. Up till now my fasted lens was a f-3.5. In auto that has almost always given good results. But the Tamron 2.8 in dark situations will choose 2.8 and without not knowing how to use such a setting most of the images suck. any ideas on how to limit the camera to a certain min aperture of 3.5 or should i just make her shoot in P and teach her to shift.

[zona5101]

why do the images at 2.8 "suck"? No depth of field?
Besides shifting program mode you could just shoot in Av mode.

[Sterling]

^^Agreed. Sounds like what you want to do is pretty much the definition of aperture priority mode.

[Jim Bryant]

F2.8 doesn't suck, if you know what you're doing. Most of my sports photos are shot at f2.8. I want the viewer's eye to go the action and no farther.

[nickbedford]

Originally Posted by Jim Bryant

F2.8 doesn't suck, if you know what you're doing. Most of my sports photos are shot at f2.8. I want the viewer's eye to go the action and no farther.

QFT.

One of the primary reasons DSLRs produce better images by a million times is that they *can* produce the small depth of field needed to separate subject from environment.

[ellie mac]

Ummm, without wanting to get any noses out of joint - I think the point of the OP's question is that while he has no problem with using f2.8 effectively, his wife is possibly not so well versed in photography and therefore using f2.8 is not one of her skills. I have the same problem with my husband - he has no idea about photography but will want to grab my camera to take a photo of my son & I when we are out and about. He then generally asks me how to make it zoom. (Darling, that lens doesn't zoom - you have to move yourself)

I'm not that familar with your camera, I have a 400D though so modes probably similar. To be honest if it is low light causing the issue, whichever mode you are in may have issues. AV might be best, but be aware that it will slow the shutter speed to compensate. P will do the same - if you are shifting to get a particular aperture it will slow the shutter speed to compensate. You may need to check the best settings for her before you hand it over - which is what I would do in this situation. Also not sure how P mode influences iso, so that may also be something to look at.

I ended up buying my husband a p&s which is mostly ok - it has all the menus for taking certain types of scenes, so easy to follow & he generally does ok with it as long as he holds it steady & doesn't have his finger over the lens LOL!

Good Luck.

[Biomech]

I'm guessing it's an issue of not focussing in the right place and the OPs photos coming out blurring. f2.8 can be the difference between a nose being in focus and the eyes out of focus.

[troutwhisperer]

QFT - Quantum Field Theory?

[Jim Bryant]

Originally Posted by troutwhisperer

QFT - Quantum Field Theory?

Really, who the hell knows what QFT means...wish folks would speak real English.

[IABoomer]

QFT=quoted for truth. It's often used as a statement saying that the poster agrees with the post being quoted. Other times, someone will QFT in case the quoted poster said something that they may regret and want to edit, so the original posting is saved for posterity.

The Urban Dictionary is usually good for looking up terms like this, along with some more seedy things you might see posted. Urban Dictionary, December 13: emberrorist

For example, yesterday's term might just deserve to be used around here some more: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=PHOBAR