Well, its a camera, and thats all I know, I have a copy of popular photography, and they advertise SLR Bodies, I'm hoping that its the camera with out a lens am I correct?
Second Question, can some body explain the lens stuff, like 77-30mm whats that?
Third Question, what is an SLR camera? Do they come in film as well?
What da heck is an SLR?
-
sd70accsxt700
- Sofa King follower
- Posts: 6159
- Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 1:59 pm
- Location: Toledo, OH.
Well I am not that techinical in this stuff but I will give you a general deal.
SLR (Single Reflective Lense) Like I said im not that techinical in this stuff, but here is an attempt. In a point and shoot, (110) the shutter opens and exposes the film just the way you see it. In a SLR it comes through the lens and is reflected off a small miror, and then exposed. All I know is that a SLR gives you 10x better photos and control over things you have control of. And yes these are the cameras with out the lens.
You mm is the focal lenght of the lense (?). It is like this, your normal everyday way you look at things, is at 50mm. The smaller the number the wider you see. The larger the number the narrower you see. Like 50 is normal 25 would by like extending you field of vision on both side of you eyes (I cant rember what its called all I can think of is Tunnel Vision). Somthing like 200 lets you bring things in closer, than you could get at 50. Now all of these sizes come in a fixed focal length (lens) is only for that mm. Or a lot come in a Zoom up to about 600mm with out getting to out of hand. I have a 28-80mm zoom and a 70-300mm zoom.
SLR are all film. In fact I am not sure of a camera that isint film, (ok digital) That is all cameras used until the digital revolution came along.
If I were you I would think about going stright to digital if you have a choice. A lot depends on what you want to do. If you are just taking ocasional photos, then a better point and shoot (Im talking digital now, as far as film is conserned, dont wast your time with anything other than a SLR) is fine, like what Scott has. If you are serious about getting published in a major magazine, (ie. Trains, CTC board, ect.) then nothing but a SLR(now once again I am taling film, as one like Scott has digitaly is and can be just as good as a SLR), as it is still major practice amongst the magiznes to accept slides (print film will not reproduce in a magazine, as it becomes pixilated when blown up), but more and more are starting to switch to accepting digital material as well. One advantage to a SLR also is more choices for lens, there are some point and shoots, (onece again like Scotts that you can get diffent lens for) Also for the most part, if you get really serious about photography, if you ever attempt night time photography, you can hook up wireless flash bulbs, and such, where with most point and shoots, you cant.
There is a whole lot more than I can explain bu that is the basics. Also most SLR in the digitl era, have higher megapixels than most point and shoots can get. This comes into play when blowing up photos.
SLR (Single Reflective Lense) Like I said im not that techinical in this stuff, but here is an attempt. In a point and shoot, (110) the shutter opens and exposes the film just the way you see it. In a SLR it comes through the lens and is reflected off a small miror, and then exposed. All I know is that a SLR gives you 10x better photos and control over things you have control of. And yes these are the cameras with out the lens.
You mm is the focal lenght of the lense (?). It is like this, your normal everyday way you look at things, is at 50mm. The smaller the number the wider you see. The larger the number the narrower you see. Like 50 is normal 25 would by like extending you field of vision on both side of you eyes (I cant rember what its called all I can think of is Tunnel Vision). Somthing like 200 lets you bring things in closer, than you could get at 50. Now all of these sizes come in a fixed focal length (lens) is only for that mm. Or a lot come in a Zoom up to about 600mm with out getting to out of hand. I have a 28-80mm zoom and a 70-300mm zoom.
SLR are all film. In fact I am not sure of a camera that isint film, (ok digital) That is all cameras used until the digital revolution came along.
If I were you I would think about going stright to digital if you have a choice. A lot depends on what you want to do. If you are just taking ocasional photos, then a better point and shoot (Im talking digital now, as far as film is conserned, dont wast your time with anything other than a SLR) is fine, like what Scott has. If you are serious about getting published in a major magazine, (ie. Trains, CTC board, ect.) then nothing but a SLR(now once again I am taling film, as one like Scott has digitaly is and can be just as good as a SLR), as it is still major practice amongst the magiznes to accept slides (print film will not reproduce in a magazine, as it becomes pixilated when blown up), but more and more are starting to switch to accepting digital material as well. One advantage to a SLR also is more choices for lens, there are some point and shoots, (onece again like Scotts that you can get diffent lens for) Also for the most part, if you get really serious about photography, if you ever attempt night time photography, you can hook up wireless flash bulbs, and such, where with most point and shoots, you cant.
There is a whole lot more than I can explain bu that is the basics. Also most SLR in the digitl era, have higher megapixels than most point and shoots can get. This comes into play when blowing up photos.
https://flic.kr/ps/jSuAb My Flickr photos!
Re: What da heck is an SLR?
Yes. Many people who buy SLR's or DSLR's already have lenses, so buying a camera with a "kit lens" included adds expense and it unnecessary. I already have a decent collection of lenses, so when I buy my next DSLR, I will buy only the body and probably save a couple hundred bucks.Mike Tabone wrote:Well, its a camera, and thats all I know, I have a copy of popular photography, and they advertise SLR Bodies, I'm hoping that its the camera with out a lens am I correct?
Well, Matt (?) already answered it pretty good, but I will also add f-stops to the equation. If you see a zoom lens that is listed as "70-200 f4", that means that across the entire zoom range from 70 to 200mm, the fastest f-stop you can have is f4. The lower the number, the faster the lens is, meaning it lets in more light, so your shutter speeds can be faster. For instance...if you were shooting at f4 and had your shutter set at 100 for the proper exposure, the equivalent to that on a faster lens would be f2.8 at 200 shutter speed. That doubling of light (from f4 to f2.8, the aperture doubles in diameter and the amount of light) allows you to increase the shutter speed by twice as much, thus giving you opportunities to freeze action in the same lighting conditions. However, your depth of field will decrease with a larger aperature (that's a discussion for another post). But for now, focus on this: 2.0, 2.8, 4.0, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, are the general f-stop numbers. On that scale, 16 is the smallest (the numbers DO go much higher and the aperture openings much smaller, but for this discussion I'll just stick with the basics), and with each "stop" of light increase, the number becomes smaller. Hence, 16 being the smallest, if you set the fstop to 8, you let in twice as much light. If you then set it to 5.6, you again double the amount of light, 4.0 doubles it again, and so on. The SMALLER the number, the LARGER the aperature opens and MORE light comes in. Following me? I'll stop now so as to not confuse you any more.Second Question, can some body explain the lens stuff, like 77-30mm whats that?
SLR: Single Lens ReflexThird Question, what is an SLR camera? Do they come in film as well?
Look at it this way: ALL SLR's are film cameras, but not all film cameras are SLR's. With the advent of digital cameras, "DSLR" has become the common term. You can still buy an SLR camera and they are generally MUCH cheaper in price, but you are going to be spending more in the long run on film, processing, time, etc. I'm not trying to discourage you to start with film, but if you do, it would probably be best to take a class. With a DSLR, you can learn a LOT just by going out and shooting as you can almost instantly see the results of different settings. I was in the dark just a year ago on this. I always wanted to be a photographer but the whole aperture, shutter speed, ISO thing always confused me. It wasn't until I bought my Rebel XT and started experimenting (and reading photog books) that I started to GET IT. Of course, you should still probably take a photography course if you're serious about it, as there is MUCH to learn about lighting, composition, etc that you just can't get from simply reading a book (well, not entirely true, I suppose, as there are some GREAT books out there).
Feel free to ask more questions...I'll try to help as much as I'm capable of.