 BetterPhoto Member |
Using a Remote Release Cable I am thinking about getting one of these, to take pictures of my son and I. I'm thinking it would be easier than using the timer. What your thoughts? Would I really like and benefit from buying one? Thanks a bunch!
|
|
|
|
||
|
Nancy Grace Chen |
Hi Stephanie, I just bought one, and I wish I had bought it earlier. I think it works MUCH better than the timer, especially with people. When you set the timer when doing portraits, the subject's expression starts becoming stiff and unnatural while they're posing and waiting for the camera to actually take the pic. With the remote release, the expressions are more natural, and you can work a lot faster.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Bob Cammarata |
For normal portraiture, your timer would probably be the most practical. The only drawback being that you never really know the exact moment to "smile".) The cable remotes work fine at short distances, but for portraits, you may have trouble hiding the wire. One thing to keep in mind anytime you operate an SLR by remote cable - OR when using a timer - use a manual exposure setting or cover the eyepiece. When you use auto-exposure, stray light will filter in through the eyepiece and bounce off the mirror, throwing off your in-camera meter.
|
|
|
|
||
- Shirley D. Cross-Taylor Contact Shirley D. Cross-Taylor Shirley D. Cross-Taylor's Gallery |
My remote release for the Nikon has no wire. It uses an infrared signal, and I get instant response. So, if you are shooting children, animals, or anyone, there is no lag time. You can catch the exact moment. Your timer does not give you that.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||