SLR cameras

[GypsyRR]

Lenticular cloud - tapping forehead to enhance memory - lenticular cloud....

Try a 2 X 4 to drive it deep into your memory!


Taosport:

What lens did you use to take the Lenticular cloud picture?

[taosports]

Taosport:

What lens did you use to take the Lenticular cloud picture?

Having a memory deficiency disorder similar to MikeCam's (think it comes with age) and not wanting to try your 2X4 cure, I had to look it up.

Used a 100mm focal length and stitched together 3 or 4 photos to get the final image I wanted.

[chris]

It’s not the camera or the lens folks…those are just tools. It's all about the eye and brain behind those tools that makes great images. Some of my favorite photos that I’ve made on my trips are from a cheap 3-4 megapixel camera.

A simple point and shoot camera is all you need for 90% of the images you see in our Great Rides section. Knowing how to use the camera and how to make a striking image with it through composition and photo processing (Photoshop, etc…) is the secret.

I call it Making a photo rather than taking one.

Agree completely. It's a little different nowadays to the time when you sent off a roll of 36 hoping for one good image! So much more freedom. Also, I often wonder, given the power of Photoshop, if the camera is losing importance as you can fix pretty much anything in there so long as you have the basic info to start with. That's where the better cameras score I guess, more information in the original image to manipulate.

My point and shoot is an A85 which has amazing capabilities despite it's small sensor and lens.

I think I just want to get back to that old 'real camera' feel that an SLR gives me, that and total control over what I shoot and a bigger lens =more light which is what it's all about. Of course I shouldn't forget to mention that it's partly about having nice toys...

[taosports]

I think I just want to get back to that old 'real camera' feel that an SLR gives me, that and total control over what I shoot and a bigger lens =more light which is what it's all about.

I completely understand Chris. I don't want anyone to think I'm trying to discourage them from buying an expensive piece of equipment if that’s what they truly want to do. I just want people to realize that the camera is just a tool and you need to know how to use that tool to produce great photos. Great photos can be made with very simple inexpensive cameras.

You can walk into a mechanics shop and see carts and trays and walls covered with expensive top of the line tools but what good are they if the mechanic doesn’t know the difference between a torx and an allen bolt? A good mechanic like a good photographer will know how to use those tools. And having the best tools will make the job easier if you know how to use them.

As I said before, good composition and knowing how to use an image processor like Photoshop are the keys to great photos. It’s not about the camera.

Of course I shouldn't forget to mention that it's partly about having nice toys...

Agreed. My wallet reminds me of that every time I open it.

[toner87]

I bought my Canon 20D just 2 years ago after nearly 5 years with a Nikon 990, a camera that was pretty much "state of the art" when I bought it. "State of the art" but ridiculously slow, one of the reasons for the DSLR purchase. Now, over 22,000 images later I have no regrets about having spent the money I spent on the camera body and the various lenses and other goodies. And, though I do look longingly at the newer models, I am well aware that this camera suits my needs perfectly. It is just fantastic to be able to look through the lens and fire away at 3-5 frames per second and not worry about whether or not your camera is keeping up. The flexibility in the user modes, the ability to change lenses, the amount of data the camera captures; heck it all adds up to camera nirvana.
There are camera stores that rent out DSLR's... It's not cheap, but it could help you make your decision. I have no doubt, after using a DSLR for any amount of time, that you'd end up springing for one.
It's funny, now I'm in the market for a smaller point and shoot digital camera that I can stash in a pocket because DSLR's are pretty bulky and sometimes are just not appropriate equipment to be carrying.
T.

[WhoZat]

Steve,
SLR? Film? Ricoh is offering (in Japan) a quality digital point & shoot I'd LOVE to afford!!!! Single focal length WIDE angle lens, and EXPENSIVE..... but alas, you want film and a really cheap SLR. Why film?

"I don't want to spend too much either. Less than $100 would be good."

Well..... folk are getting rid of thier film camera bodies, so I would imagine that you CAN find something of quality AND inexpensive. Heck, drop me a line and might sell ya my Canon EOS 10S and (for more money....) a good zoom lens.

Spend your money on good optics, glass, single focal length of under 50mm. Pick up a camera body in good shape, well taken care of, and one that can use the lens you buy. There are inexpensive Fuji bodies out there that can use good name brand lens'.....

But in the end, it's actually all about lighting (painting with), texture, creating tension, and eye catching composition. For that matter, a cheap camera with a lousy lens can create some fantastic shots if you learn about "The Golden Thirds", using light to your advantage, and if you have a gentle trigger finger.

Composition, lighting, try to involve the viewer by using a wide angle lens, and NEVER center your subject (unless you want the viewer to fall asleep while looking at the image). By the way, I'm not a good photographer..... just been lucky a few times.

Why film???

[chris]

It's funny, now I'm in the market for a smaller point and shoot digital camera that I can stash in a pocket because DSLR's are pretty bulky and sometimes are just not appropriate equipment to be carrying.
T.

There you go, you need all of them!!
For P&S I have the tiny A85 which is great.

After months of deliberation, intense research and argument it comes down to this: the 30D is too pricey, the EOS400D is just too small and feels too plasticky to pay £500 for...so on that basis I'm buying the Nikon D80 as best compromise between image quality, size, build quality and features....no "you don't wanna buy that" comments till next week when I've got it please, I can't bear to start over....
We also have a cupboard full of Nikon lenses at work which I can borrow so it would be rude not to...

I'm also very lucky working in education that we get that latest software like CS2 as it arrives and are licenced to use it at home as well.

Seems to me that you have to buy what suits you best and learn to use it. Whatever faults it may have you can work around so long as they are consistent!

[yjleesvrr]

I wish Nikon and Canon would follow Leica's lead with the R9 and make their bodies so that you can upgrade the back in the future with more megapixels. The problem with Leica is that it's so expensive you might as well go for a medium format camera like a Hasselblad. Unless of course you want the convenient size of a 35mm body.

The Japanese approach to cameras is similar to their approach to cars and motorcycles. Uniformity.

[Wass]

I tend do disagree about using Photoshop to 'make' the image. That's a tool to create artsy images, or to rescue a badly exposed photo. Relying on it to fix all your images holds you back from really working on getting it right when you release the shutter. Having an eye for composition, light levels, etc...all the old school photography stuff is just as applicable in the digital realm.
And no amount of post-processing will make an out of focus image in focus.
Also, if you ever enter a photo in an amateur photo contest (like National Geographics), the rules plainly state that the image must have absolutely zero post-processing.
That said, my next camera will be the new Nikon D80 with a DSC lens. Finally will upgrade from my Nikon 995, which is an excellent (but slow and antiquated by now) digital camera. I'll keep it around, along with a pocket camera, but I'm ready for an SLR as my main battle camera.

[chris]

WOW! I bought my D80 this morning with the 18-70 kit lens and that's all I can say..

Wass, I tried the images in CS2 and hit the 'autolevels' and nothing happened! The sharpness is incredible and it's so easy to use.
A few shots from the afternoon dog walk. These are as they come, no post processing other than size reduction from 3872 x 2592 to 948 x 648.



This is the field behind the house



other direction, a touch green I think but the light today is fantastic








my dawg, Meg



Lane on the way home.



These were all taken using various automatic settings so I'm sure they can be improved once I get the hang of the manual settings but I just had to get out there and play! Very happy chappy!

[taosports]

I tend do disagree about using Photoshop to 'make' the image.

With all due respect Wass, I'm going to disagree with you on this one. I guess that's why they call this a forum.

That's (Photoshop) a tool to create artsy images, or to rescue a badly exposed photo. Relying on it to fix all your images holds you back from really working on getting it right when you release the shutter.

Yes, Photoshop is a wonderful tool for both the artist and that poor amateur photographer who needs an image rescued.

Ansel Adams, probably the greatest nature photographer ever was a creative genius in the darkroom. Talk about manipulating images! He was a master at exposing his large format negatives so that they held all the detail they could possibly hold. Then he went into his darkroom and performed magic spending hours on a single print to bring back those tones that he saw out in nature and make them come alive on photographic paper. He used his hands and pieces of cardboard and wire (his form of "Photoshop") to manipulate his images. If he were alive today, I have no doubt he would have embraced Photoshop. He would have loved it because it would have saved him hours and hours of darkroom time and allowed him to go back out looking for more of his incredible images.

Having an eye for composition, light levels, etc...all the old school photography stuff is just as applicable in the digital realm.

I whole-heartedly agree with you here Wass.

Also, if you ever enter a photo in an amateur photo contest (like National Geographics), the rules plainly state that the image must have absolutely zero post-processing.

Then I guess Ansel Adams when he was an amateur could never have entered this contest. Actually, this "rule" cracks me up. Back in the days before Photoshop, National Geographic used a Scitex computer to squeeze together two pyramids to fit their vertical cover on a story of Egypt. They did this without a note to their readers that such a manipulation was performed.

[taosports]

WOW! I bought my D80 this morning with the 18-70 kit lens and that's all I can say..

Congrats on your purchase Chris! Have fun with it and keep sharing your great photos with us.

[chris]

Thanks Michael, I'm sure I'm going to enjoy this!

[munchmeister]

WOW! I bought my D80 this morning with the 18-70 kit lens and that's all I can say..

Great shots, loved the one of Meg. You might be interested in the High Dynamic Range technique for those shots with both shadow and light... it is a post processing technique that works really well for that kind of exposures.

As to the post processing debate, I will only chime in that I don't think there are many photographers left who will spend the time in the darkroom like Ansel Adams did, as pointed out by Michael (not that post processing with Photoshop is fast, mind you). Like it or not, everything is moving toward digital and the computer has become the darkroom of the 21st century. Magazine and other print production is now almost entirely digital as well. If you submit anything nowadays, for a contest, as a freelance, etc. the publisher, online or print, usually wants a high res digital file. Of course there are many non-digital photographers who will scan a print and those turn out great, if done right.

http://www.johnfielder.com/home.php

Even the fantastic photographers who have the beautiful art galleries in malls, airports, etc. of their landscape photos (like John Fielder, above) done with 8 x 10 view cameras, have the images scanned then printed as IRIS prints ("giclee"), which are, essentially, very fine ink jet printers. But guys like Fielder know that, like Adams, the very best work comes from great effort.

The digital vs film debate is a robust one but, in the end, it is as Michael said, all about the grey matter behind the lens, no matter what device captures the image. I think anyone who wants to create a great image knows they have to work at it from the get-go. Sometimes we get lucky, and can be at the right place at the right time but a great image is not made in post processing, either with darkroom or with Photoshop. The "information" has to be there and that involves the brain more than it does the computer.

Guess I'd better stop. I get carried away sometimes

[Wass]

Michael -
Thanks for the reply and you make an interesting point about Ansel Adams. I guess exotic darkroom techniques are really no different than the skillful use of Photoshop when you think about it. And god knows my best friends are the gamma corrector and the unsharp mask. But whenever I use them I always say to myself 'gee, my exposure was crap, so I better fix it', or something like that and wish I woulda got it spot on when I took it. Better to have the tools to fix it than not I suppose.

and Chris -
Your collection of pix from the D80 was more informative for me than the 19 reviews I read. Really really nice. Thanks for posting them.

[chris]

and Chris -
Your collection of pix from the D80 was more informative for me than the 19 reviews I read. Really really nice. Thanks for posting them.

I read a lot of reviews as well. Debating between the Rebel, the 30D and the D80 and having got hold of the rebel this morning there was no way I could see £500 worth of camera there. Plus the kit lens is all but useless so the Nikon wins hands down! It's going to take me some time to get to grips with the manual tho!

Anything you want to ask about it offsite just email me!

[chris]

Great shots, loved the one of Meg. You might be interested in the High Dynamic Range technique for those shots with both shadow and light... it is a post processing technique that works really well for that kind of exposures.

Hi
tell me more..

[munchmeister]

Chris:
High Dynamic Range imaging is, in a way, what Ansel Adams did. He did it by spending hours in the darkroom. Today, with a digital darkroom (your computer and a digital image) the wonders of technology can make this available, to allow you to make better images. Still, it requires some work just like it did for Adams, and some understanding of your tools and how images are captured by digital camera sensors.

Here is a good example of what it can do:


Note the skylight, the stained glass windows, the detail in the beam structure. These images are from http://www.cybergrain.com/tech/hdr/ which has a very, very good explanation of HDR. I especially like his mention of the painters, like El Greco, and how they "tricked the eye" in their paintings. Google HDR imaging or High Definition Range imaging and you'll find, as ever, lots of stuff on HDR. You will also see some images utilizing this technique that are decidedly non realistic but interesting nonetheless. Whether it's for you or not is your decision, of course. Lots more options these days !!

HTH
--Doug

[chris]

. You will also see some images utilizing this technique that are decidedly non realistic but interesting nonetheless. Whether it's for you or not is your decision, of course. Lots more options these days !!

HTH
--Doug

Cheers Doug, the difference is amazing! Will have a look at that.
I'm always open to suggestions, my work is all about innovation, looking at how we make use of new technology. AND how to push it so this looks very interesting to me.
I also produce 360 pano shots and this looks like it can address some of the problems encountered there as well.