What am I doing wrong? *pics*
 

Very Very Amateur photographer here. Previously had really poor, blurry pictures in dim lighting, I thought that the reason was my lens 50-200mm lens. So here at dinner I'm using a 50mm 1.8f prime on a Canon XTi.

Apperature is at 1.8, iso 1600. Pictures are clear, yet the color is dull, and rather dark. What can I do to get some nice vivid colors?

*ignore the bad framing and everything, I would just like to know how to get some good lighting and colors going.

Your input is appreciated!

http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e1...2/IMG_2117.jpg
http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e1...2/IMG_2130.jpg
http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e1...2/IMG_2151.jpg
http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e1...2/IMG_2192.jpg

You need to set your white balance to whatever the light in the restaurant is - probably tungsten. If you shot these in RAW, then you can go back and change it.

^
Werd~ RAW is your best friend and memory cards are dirt cheap these days.

Regarding the shots, pics need more purpose and be more playful with lights. Photography is an art of light capture. Purpose as the main thing you want to describe in the shot.

Last but not least, google "photography composition" and play around with them.

Question: Just RAW or RAW + L ....which is better?

I beleive the RAW + L will take a Jpeg as well as a RAW image...

I shoot RAW only. You would want to output your own RAW-->JPG anyway. Softwares offer better conversion than in-camera.

shooting with such a high ISO will cause noise. Its not as noticeable on your smaller images. Getting a flash and bouncing it would improve your image. It would also solve your blurry images in dim lighting.

Agreed, especially with the XTi's Digic 2 processor, ISO 1600 should only be a last resort

If you do shoot JPEG and feel that you don't want to use RAW, you can use adobe photoshop lightroom to adjust your white balance, exposure, saturation, etc. Just a little post processing can improve an image. Just don't over do it.

If your going to shoot raw, your going to have to spend more time post processing in lightroom/bridge/photoshop. In the end, you get more flexibility and quality in an image. I personally shoot strictly in RAW only.

Haha.... I hear all the pros shoot in only RAW...

^ if your serious about photography, raw is the best option and choice.

here is a good article on why raw is better
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/re...mera-raw.shtml

To answer your question, the best thing to keep in mind for your pictures is the fact that without good lighting, you simply aren't going to get "nice vivid colors".

Your picture will only be as good as the light that touches your sensor...and the light that exists in a dimly lit restaurant is not enough to make those vivid colors fly out at you.

Invest into a hotshoe flash

thanks for all the replies guys, I did some tests in shooting jpeg vs raw and there is definitely more flexibility and higher quality with RAW.

regarding flash and lighting, what are your feelings around using those ebay diffusers for the on-camera flash?

Hot shoe flashes tend to be a little bigger than my liking

http://images.channeladvisor.com/Sel...M-MIS003_a.jpg
http://trade.skyhillhk.com/flash_diff10_02_f.jpg
http://imgs.inkfrog.com/pix/gamerlined66/HI-pop.jpg

^^ Those will help a bit, but because the original light source is so small, there are only very limited things that can be done.

Yeah, invest in a small and cheap flash. In Nikon, we have a SB400. I carry it around with my D700. It's better than in camera flash and gets a lot of thing done without the bulky-ness.

Canon I think they have a 2x0-EX flash?

^Canon has the 430EX II as an entry level flash. the 580EX II Prosumer model.

^ he mentioned he doesn't want to lug around even something like the 430ex II

smaller option would be the 270ex

http://media.the-digital-picture.com...lite-Flash.jpg

^entry level is the 270EX as he was saying:

http://www.bccamera.com/index.php?ma...oducts_id=3505

^ yea i just realized that now. you can't really call it a useful flash. It produces the same power as your on-board pop-up flash.

the minimum that should be bought is the 430.

^ Can you even change the angle of the 270EX?

Might as well invest in a 480EX. =]

not really, the 270 has wider coverage and longer distance then a regular pop-up flash,.. and it does have the bounce flash ability

XTi flash has a guide number of 13m
The 270ex has a guide number of 27m

I would hardly call those the same power?

^ i was wrong. I admit it. I just remembering reading somewhere that it was a weak flash.

I still standby the 430EX as a minimum for a ext flash.

^

Yeah, a full size flash like 430EX is great for proper flash jobs. But the OP is just starting. His photography style might not even need a flash at all.

I have a full set of SB800+SB600 combo, but that's not what I carry around in my bag. I only carry them when I know I'm gonna need them. Hence a suggestion of small flash like 270EX/SB400. These little flashes are a lot cheaper and way more versatile than the in-cam one.

I got my SB400 for like 85USD shipped. It's a great little unit to have it in your bag for the unforeseen event of a flash need.