Noob question... help?

[Splutter]

Hi everyone, i'm new to this forum, and had just accquired a 300d a few days back. Some questions to ask =P

1. At shutter priority, the fastest i could go up to was 1/200 with the in-built flash. Did this limitation occured due to the camera itself or due to the flash. If it is due to the flash, could I actually use an external flash and achieve the max shutter speed of 1/4000 of the camera?

2. Macro vs telephoto. Is it possible to just use a telephoto lens and zoom in all the way to achieve a composition the same as a macro lens? If so, what are the main difference apart from heavier weight and min focusing dist?

3. I think i read somewhere using a smaller aperture value will result in shaper images. Isnt the sharpness of the image accounted by the focus solely?

Thanks to anyone who can help me out with this questions

 

[showtime]

1) its the limitation of the camera... called flash sync speed... go read the manual. it describes it fully

2) macro lens are about ultra close focusing... and reproction ratios of 1:1 or 1:2 at most... telephotos do not give these reproduction ratios... and no where near the close focussing.

3) most lenses not their sharpest at its max apperture... so stop down a coulpe of stops to get better sharpness... but dont over do it... no need F22... F8 will be sharp already. the lack of shapness at wide open appertures is due to something called sperical abberation... but dont bother about these technicallities...

shoot more...

 

[Ah Pao]

...could I actually use an external flash and achieve the max shutter speed of 1/4000 of the camera?

Yes, you can, just get a flash that supports high-speed sync, e.g. 420EX, 550EX, or Sigma EF500 DG super. Read http://www.digit-life.com/articles/sigmaef430superef500super/ for a better understanding of high-speed sync (although it's a review of the Sigma flash).

 

[clive]

being in focus and being sharp are separate issues.

using smaller aperture will lead to a larger range of entities found in the scene to be in acceptable focus. (more depth of field is acieved)
the problem is that linguistically speaking, the phrase "being sharper" is usually loosely used to describe "being in focus"

being sharper is about how well the lens resolves the image.

you can be using a sharp lens to take a pic that is slightly out of focus. or u may photograph the same scene with a less sharp lens but in perfect focus. if u can tell the diff b/w sharpness and being in focus, then the 2 pics will look (slightly) different