The Sony NEX-5R has an "AEL w/ shutter" option that     Sets whether or not to fix the exposure when you press the shutter   button halfway down (On/Off)   (from the manual)  What are the pros and cons to locking the exposure? Under what situations does it help, or not help?  I can think of specific examples where locking exposure helps, and examples where it hurts, but I wanted to check if there's a bigger picture I'm missing.  As I understand, this setting controls only the exposure and not the focus, which is controlled by setting the focus mode to AF-S or AF-C.  Note that this camera doesn't have an AEL or AE/AF lock button.
123792
What are the typical situations where you should use AE for locking exposure?
107045
I see a lot of questions about low light, and one of them which stood out to me was   All my flash pictures tend to turn out great, but my shots in low light without flash are always terrible   blurry bad colors under exposed   My setup is: Nikon D3200 with a 35mm f/1.8 prime.  After reading the above question, it seemed that I should have gotten a good photo, but below is what I got in RAW. Settings: ISO 800, 35mm, f/1.8 1/15sec.     Can someone give me a suggestion of what my settings should have been, perhaps? (Remember that I don't want to use the flash, so I can capture the ambient). It's typically situations or candid portraits like this I would be taking. Also any advice on what quick adjustments I could make if I get a dim result like below?  I don't want to ask for the subject to stand still until I get a great shot, so if I get a poor result on my first trial, what settings should I immediately switch to in order to hopefully get my second shot closer to a likeable shot?  Note: getting another body or lens would be a last resort if I run out of options.
90940
I use my DSLR (Nikon D500) for both photography and video, and I prefer autofocus for photography and manual focus for video (to get rid of autofocus noise).  There is an option for changing between the two on both the body and the lens, and obviously it is very annoying to have to keep flicking 2 switches to do the same thing all of the time.  Do you only have to change one of them, and would doing this cause any damage to the camera and/or the lens?  (I am aware that a similar question has already been asked before, however the answers said more what is "best practice" and not so much if there are any consequences to only changing one of them)  Thanks!
21418
Is there anyone using reverse ring and know how to lock the aperture.   I tried doing the techniques provided on youtube. First connecting the lens on original positions then lock the aperture by pressing the AE lock button on the camera. after that reverse the lens.  But this method is not locking the aperture.  Help if anyone know how to lock in reverse.  Thanks.
32930
I have found that my Nikon 60mm Micro AF-D changes aperture from 2.8 to 3.2 when used with a D90. I have tried both A and M mode. Is it by design? Why?  I intend to buy  and it will lock the maximum aperture at 2.0 (my guess) instead 2.8. So should I buy it or not, or would it be better to buy the newer 50mm 1.4 AF-S version?
113478
I have a hard time manual focusing my Canon EOS 350D. Compared to the few higher spec DSLRs that I played with, and that have a pentaprism, my Rebel's (pentamirror) viewfinder feels crammed and somewhat darker. I feel like I have to squint in order to figure out if the subject is in focus. It also has a simple matte focusing screen, so it doesn't help figuring out when critical focus is achieved either.  I remember having used my dad's all-manual Praktica film camera in my teen years, and at the time I felt no burden with manual focus (exposure, now, that's a different story...)  I think the focusing screen on that camera was a split image + microprism setup, something like this:  Full viewfinder view:   Up close:   All this being said, here's my question:  Why do (most of?) the DSLRs of today not use such focusing screens? Do the manufacturers work under the assumption that most focusing is AF (which is probably true)? But still, how would it hurt to have a split image as a focusing aid?  Is there an obvious downside to such focusing screens, that I am missing?  For the sake of completeness, I have found two places that sell replacement focusing screens for DSLRs. I'm sure there are others.   , I think based in Taiwan. They have a great  of different types of focusing screens (that's where the above image links go, too).  .  The installation procedure looks a lot less scary than I would have guessed. I think I'll get me one of those, maybe it will put an end to my manual focusing misery.
113056
Does anyone know how TTL calculates the amount of power to put in after the preflash is done? I understand that the value is somewhat brand specific, but what is the general logic? Because if you think about it, before flash the camera calculates the exposure to the 18% rule. But this makes no sense for flash.   For example, if I'm already at the perfect exposure (18%) before flash, the flash will still fire. If it followed that logic, it should not fire at all.   Also, if the logic is to bring the whole scene to 18%, doesn't that mean the flash power is inversely proportional to my continuous light exposure? i.e., the more I underexpose the background, the more power it will flash?
9188
I primarily shoot low-light photos, and I upgraded from a point-and-shoot to the Sony NEX-5R (which has an APS-C sensor) a few months back.  However, I find that the low-light performance of the NEX-5R is not as good as I'd like. I find myself shooting at ISO 400 or lower, with a tripod, even at f/2.8 (I do have an f/1.8 lens, too).  I was wondering if I should upgrade to a full-frame camera. I'm told that there's only a one-stop difference between a full-frame and an APS-C sensor, which doesn't seem like much. For example, this is a 13-second exposure on my NEX (at ISO 100):     With a one-stop advantage on a full-frame sensor, I'd still need a 6.5-second exposure at ISO 200, to maintain the same quality. Even if it were a .65-second exposure, I'd still need a tripod, in which case I might as well use an APS-C sensor and give it a few more seconds.  Am I correct in understanding that for me, full-frame provides a negligible advantage at a high price? Thanks.
30122
Does the aperture ring lock the apertures beyond, say 5.6 at length lens's telephoto end? Does the lens introduce an obstacle to the aperture ring so the lens can't be opened anymore beyond the aperture at the telephoto end?  And why do lenses behave like this, anyway? Why don't they have constant apertures throughout their focal range?
12977
Hai.  I have a question, I switched from Canon to Sony a while ago and I found out that if I shot bright places, like the sky, the cloud that is supposed to be seen clearly, looks like a blown-out highlight (like real crazy), as you can see on my picture.  I have to set a low exposure just so the highlight is not blown out, and it’s only happening on Sony, not on Canon. On Canon the object is visible, but the background (cloud) is still seen all just fine.  Do you guys know what to change on the Sony to get that good look? Is it the setting or the lens? (BTW, I’m using a Sony 35mm f/1.8 lens.)
89596
Here's a typical situation during vacations:   I set my Canon 77D on a tripod I change the shooting setting to "timed series" (2-10 shots after a 10-second delay) I go stand in front of the camera Problem: camera uses the initial focus instead of focusing when the actual shot takes place Result: blurry shot of myself with a perfectly sharp background   Is there a setting that forces the camera to re-focus before each timed shot? I've tried switching to AI Servo, but it didn't help. I'm also aware I can use a Bluetooth/IR remote or connect the camera to my phone, but a simple timer is a lot easier and faster.
97533
I have been doing so much research on iso, and for awhile I've been going with the theory that low iso= less noise, so I've been shooting at iso 100 and then adjusting my flashlights and increasing exposure when the photo is coming out too dark. Will i get less noise with a higher iso and a lower exposure time? It's hard for me to tell as I do not shoot cityscapes at night, I create very dark scenes with lit objects. The outside perimeters of my photos are almost always black. Thank you so much. I guess after all the research I still am not sure.
21225
I have a Canon 60D that I use for my primary hobby that is photography, but sometimes the pictures that I took are with the incorrect exposure like this:    So I want to know how I can choose the correct exposure for situations like night, intense light, poor light conditions...  PS: The image is intentionally unfocused because I was playing with styling my photos a bit, not that it's a problem.
114998
I know there's lots of talk around here about 'noise' levels in photographs, but what about the actual sound that the shutter makes on an SLR? Is there anyway to silence it a bit, or is it just a reality that we have to deal with?  I currently have a Nikon D90 and find that in quieter settings (like a church) the noise from the shutter can be a bit distracting to people around me (i haven't had anyone mention it, but I'm guessing it's apparent).  Do higher-end models have quieter functioning modes, perhaps?
65754
I have a most vexing problem.   I have a Nikon d5100 (roughly a year old) which up until two days ago handled exposure and metering just fine. However, at night, in a well lit room (florescent bulbs) in which I NEVER had problems capturing images at reasonable shutter speeds, apertures and ISOs (&lt; 400), here's what's happening now:   In Manual, even at low shutter speeds (1/90 and lower) and relatively open apertures (3.5) - ISO 640 and less - my pictures are almost completely black. Pointing the camera at a bright lightbulb just barely captures the light with heavy shadows all around it. Exposure compensation no longer has ANY effect on the exposure Shooting in Aperture Priority mode at f/3.5 at anything lower than ISO 1000 reduces my shutter speeds to 1/2 or lower to compensate.   Yes, I know. ISO. Keep in mind, the room is quite brightly lit and I never had this issue prior to last night. That being said, the only way I can capture a reasonably exposed picture here is at ISOs 6400 and above. But even a picture at 1/125, f/5.6, ISO 6400 (manual) is still ridiculously dark.  I have taken the following step to troubleshoot, to no avail:   Turned exposure compensation up to the max +5.0 - no effect Turned shutter speeds down to 1/40 and below - extremely limited effect Turned ISO up to 6400 and beyond - limited effect Update the camera's firmware (1.01 > 1.02) - no effect Reset the camera using the buttons with the two green dots - no effect, multiple tries Messed with the metering modes - no effect Turned it off and on again - no effect Stared pointedly at the camera - camera didn't even flinch   I am at an absolute loss here and I really, truly, need help.  Images:  ISO 100, f/3.8, 1/3   ISO 100, f/3.8, 1/90    ISO 1000, f/3.8, 1/90
74852
I started experimenting with the Custom Functions (C1,C2,C3) on my Canon 7D and I decided a useful one to have may be setting it up for exposure bracketing. So it's a quick switch if I ever need it, as opposed to going through the menu to set it up.  I realize the settings would vastly depend on the situation, but do you have any suggestions for some good all round settings to program in as a starting point?    Examples: 1 stop vs 1 1/3 vs 2 stop brackets / ISO choices / Metering mode / shooting mode and so on.
115061
I recently upgraded from a standard compact digital camera to one of the newish "halfway cameras", hoping to get a bit better at taking photographs through having a little more control over the settings.  Trouble is, the camera has so many settings that I'm having difficulty figuring out which to concentrate on learning about!  I think it's best to start with the basic settings, by which I mean those that actually involve something physical in how the photograph is taken, rather than with the vast array of post-processing that the camera seems capable of.  So, my question:     Which settings on my camera are "real"?  Meaning that they have an effect on the information initially read by the sensor, not post-processing.   (I would be surprised if this varied from camera to camera which is why I haven't specified my exact camera.  Also, I'm not asking for an explanation of what the settings do, though a "sound bite" that I can easily remember when I'm out with my camera would be a welcome extra.)  Standard apology: if this question has been asked before, I apologise and would appreciate knowing which question to look for the answers in.  Also, I didn't have a clue what to tag this!