Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 ... 77   Go Down
Print

Topic: The Official S-T.N Digital Camera Thread  (Read 203340 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Thunder7
Whompamagoose
*

Reputation 10
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: '02 Triumph Trophy
Miles Typed: 2240

My Photo Gallery



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #40 on: January 23, 2007, 02:01:31 pm »


Yeah, I hear you.  For me though, the bang for the buck is more in the smaller camera.  With how small you have to make web photos anyway I don't see the need for more than 5 mega pixels and I don't mind a bit of graininess every now and then.  I'm not a photographer and I don't care about getting it "just right".  It's kind of like audiophiles who spend 1k on headphones vs someone who buys a pair that have above average sound quality but you can't always hear when the guitarist slides his finger on accident switching chords.. Wink  the OP though was talking about a very easy to use camera which D-SLR's certainly aren't. (from a non "photophile" perspective.)


Agreed to a point- You buy for what you need. The comparison to the dreaded audiophile is a bit misplaced, though. yes, I think the idiots who believed in that CD Stoplight crap needed a boot to the head but I'm not aware of anybody who is going to drop $8000.00 on a Canon EOS 1DS MkII just for the "tweak" factor. That doesnt mean they dont exist, but their numbers are far less.
I bought by 30D because that is what I could afford. If I had the money I would have bought the 5D which is a full-frame 12 Mp chip. The full frame is the operative advantage here. No more magification factor on the lenses and ar higher detail which also means far more useful in a commercial environment due to that extra resolution.
Logged

Ya just whomp dat sucka right up da ol' schmegeggie.
Sport-Touring
Advertisement
*


Remove Advertisements

Nny
SUV Boxer
*

Reputation 10
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: None right now *sniff*
GPS: Palo Alto CA
Miles Typed: 796

My Photo Gallery





Ignore
« Reply #41 on: January 23, 2007, 03:13:02 pm »


I get where you're going Nny, but a DSLR is no where near the comparison of an audiophile spending outrageous amounts of coin for a set of headphones.


Heh.. Just picked an arbitrarily large number there sorry.   Embarassment  Point was that there's different levels of need (Which you seem to agree with).  There's people who are happy with crappy cell phone pics, people who want precise picture quality to the point that they can pick out individual grass strands from 100 yards, and folks in between like me that don't want to pay an arm and a leg, like the camera to do the work of figuring out exposure times etc.. but hate crappy cameras that take forever and drain batteries like there's no tomorrow.  The balance I guess is practicality vs picture quality...  But it's not a linear relationship.  I like my camera because it rates (with me) highly in both categories.  I feel I got a really great amount of camera for not a whole lot of dough Smile

If I wasn't concerned about bulk I'd probably go with an SLR because I love expensive toys (hence the motorcycle).  How are they with batteries btw?
Logged

"Empty your mind.  Be formless...  Shapeless...  Like water." -Bruce Lee
Jeff
Used to be redsuperhawk
*

Reputation 35
Offline Offline

Years Contributed: '08, '09, '10
Years Supported: '11
Motorcycles: Only a Schwinn but not leaving STN
GPS: Starved Rock is my backyard.
Miles Typed: 3960

My Photo Gallery



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #42 on: January 23, 2007, 03:52:46 pm »




Heh.. Just picked an arbitrarily large number there sorry.   Embarassment  Point was that there's different levels of need (Which you seem to agree with).  There's people who are happy with crappy cell phone pics, people who want precise picture quality to the point that they can pick out individual grass strands from 100 yards, and folks in between like me that don't want to pay an arm and a leg, like the camera to do the work of figuring out exposure times etc.. but hate crappy cameras that take forever and drain batteries like there's no tomorrow.  The balance I guess is practicality vs picture quality...  But it's not a linear relationship.  I like my camera because it rates (with me) highly in both categories.  I feel I got a really great amount of camera for not a whole lot of dough Smile

If I wasn't concerned about bulk I'd probably go with an SLR because I love expensive toys (hence the motorcycle).  How are they with batteries btw?


Yeah, I think we're pretty much in agreement, although we differ slightly as to what's important to us in a camera. I was just nitpicking.

I don't have any personal experience with a DSLR unfortunately, but a coworker has a Canon Digital Rebel XT. He said he gets about a day of shooting on the proprietary battery, which doesn't sound like much, but when he shoots for a day, he takes up to 1000 photos. He's big into airplanes, especially old warbirds. He'll go to various aero events and just shoot photos like a madman.

Jeff

PS. I don't know how anyone is happy with cell phone pics. The quality is just crap! I can't stand them. I look at cell phone pics as a novelty, definitely not a replacement for an actual camera.
Logged
Advertisement



Aero
Italophile
*

Reputation 20
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: '99 Ducati ST2
GPS: Was Ontario, now Gloucestershire, UK
Miles Typed: 810

My Photo Gallery





Ignore
« Reply #43 on: January 23, 2007, 04:18:43 pm »



Canon EOS 30D. Lenses are as follows:

85mm 1.8 (Excellent for head and product shots)
17-40mm L 4.0
28-135mm 3.5/5.6 IS Zoom
70-200mm L 4.0 Zoom
200mm L 2.8

For those of you not aware, Canon's "L" series is their high end lenses. better optics and sturdier lenses. For what its worth, I think that Nikon's standard optics are better than Canon's. Their high end optics are both excellent as are their cameras.

50mm 1.8 and 70-300 both no longer used. The 85mm is a far better lens for my needs and the standard 70-300 zoom is a low contrast piece of junk.


I also have a Canon dslr, a Rebel XT which I bought nearly two years ago and I love it! It has revived my interest in photography since I bought it because it is so easy to play around with the settings and see the difference they make. Even night shots at ISO 1600 come out really nicely and there is none of the shutter lag that you get with many compacts.
I got the camera with a 17-85mm f4-5.6 lens with image stabilisation, and since then I have added a 70-200 L f4 and a 50mm f1.8 which I find to be a great little lens for a giveaway price.
I won't take more than one lens with me on a bike trip unless I know there will be lots of photo opportunities, but I think the added bulk of a dslr is a reasonable tradeoff for picture quality.

Yawn at the pics... http://www.pbase.com/aero65
All but one or two taken with the Canon, details below each pic Smile
Logged

You should not anthropomorphize machines. They don't like it.Cool
Confucius says:
"Forget about the past, you cannot change it. Forget about the future, you cannot predict it. Forget about the present, I didn't get you one."
Jeff
Used to be redsuperhawk
*

Reputation 35
Offline Offline

Years Contributed: '08, '09, '10
Years Supported: '11
Motorcycles: Only a Schwinn but not leaving STN
GPS: Starved Rock is my backyard.
Miles Typed: 3960

My Photo Gallery



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #44 on: January 23, 2007, 05:23:07 pm »

http://www.pbase.com/aero65

Here's a corrected link.

Jeff
Logged
bsd43
*

Reputation 14
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: '02 VFR800A (no mo')
GPS: San Francisco Bay Area
Miles Typed: 1559

My Photo Gallery





Ignore
« Reply #45 on: January 23, 2007, 06:11:18 pm »

Dude, the 200 f2.8 and the 70-200 f4.0 L is quite a bit of glass to carry around on a bike, nevermind all the other focal lengths... This being a motorcycling forum and all, size and weight should definitely be considered here.

I bought my Canon G5 for bike use. Fast 35-140 equiv f2.0-3.0 lens, with a good sensor. I hate shooting action with it since it's got slow autofocus by comparison, but hell, for trips it's great. The closest thing they sell nowadays to that is either the G7, or the S3.
Logged

Sport-Touring.Net Admin
Thunder7
Whompamagoose
*

Reputation 10
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: '02 Triumph Trophy
Miles Typed: 2240

My Photo Gallery



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #46 on: January 23, 2007, 06:21:18 pm »


Dude, the 200 f2.8 and the 70-200 f4.0 L is quite a bit of glass to carry around on a bike, nevermind all the other focal lengths... This being a motorcycling forum and all, size and weight should definitely be considered here.

I bought my Canon G5 for bike use. Fast 35-140 equiv f2.0-3.0 lens, with a good sensor. I hate shooting action with it since it's got slow autofocus by comparison, but hell, for trips it's great. The closest thing they sell nowadays to that is either the G7, or the S3.


Dude, if I ever get that concerned about my 1200 Trophy's ability to put the power to the ground due to excess weight I'll go on a diet. The extra weight of two lenses that have served me well just doesnt matter.

The G5 is an excellent camera and like any kind of "point and shoot" due to my needs (And what I like to shoot) is completely useless to me. Should I want to carry any kind of all-in-one camera I will take my old Olympus IS-3 35mm, which once run through a good quality scanner will still give me better results than a small digital.

The Canon S3 and G7 are no longer contenders to be taken seriously in the "prosumer" market as Canon has done away with the ability to shoow RAW files. For what I do shooting any format but RAW is not an option.
Logged

Ya just whomp dat sucka right up da ol' schmegeggie.
Jeff
Used to be redsuperhawk
*

Reputation 35
Offline Offline

Years Contributed: '08, '09, '10
Years Supported: '11
Motorcycles: Only a Schwinn but not leaving STN
GPS: Starved Rock is my backyard.
Miles Typed: 3960

My Photo Gallery



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #47 on: January 23, 2007, 07:28:51 pm »



The Canon S3 and G7 are no longer contenders to be taken seriously in the "prosumer" market as Canon has done away with the ability to shoow RAW files. For what I do shooting any format but RAW is not an option.


For serious photographers, you make a HUGE point. I was very upset about the lack of RAW on the S2, but since I am a hobbyist at best, or basically, a guy who really enjoys photography but only takes photos of his baby girl, I chose to go the route of the S2 with JPG only.

When the time comes to get another digital camera to add to the stable, you can bank on it being a DSLR. I don't regret buying the S2, but I do wish I had the dosh to afford something at a higher level.

Jeff
Logged
bsd43
*

Reputation 14
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: '02 VFR800A (no mo')
GPS: San Francisco Bay Area
Miles Typed: 1559

My Photo Gallery





Ignore
« Reply #48 on: January 24, 2007, 12:13:02 am »

A RAW vs JPEG thread is like a Mobil 1 vs Castrol thread... Lol
Logged

Sport-Touring.Net Admin
XLR8
Does not wear Crocs
*

Reputation 8
Offline Offline

Years Contributed: '07, '08
Motorcycles: C14
GPS: Pacific Northwest
Miles Typed: 4090

My Photo Gallery




Ignore
« Reply #49 on: January 24, 2007, 12:56:19 am »

For my money Canons make the best photos - if we are talking JPEG that is.

I recently purchased a Canon XTi DSLR and I really like it. I bought it because it was small. I take it with me on my FJR and it even fits in my tankbag. For me, the extra size is worth it. However, if you don't want to take something as big as a DSLR their smaller point and shoots are excellent. Also, don't get a DSLR if you aren't willing to put a little time into post processing your images.

Here's one from last Saturday with my Canon
« Last Edit: January 24, 2007, 01:05:25 am by XLR8 » Logged
XLR8
Does not wear Crocs
*

Reputation 8
Offline Offline

Years Contributed: '07, '08
Motorcycles: C14
GPS: Pacific Northwest
Miles Typed: 4090

My Photo Gallery




Ignore
« Reply #50 on: January 24, 2007, 01:02:19 am »


I hear both of you. I've wrestled with both ends of it.

On one hand, only having a small camera will not yield the best results, compared to a DSLR.

...



This isn't true at all. There are many people that would be much better off by NOT getting a DSLR.
Logged
Thunder7
Whompamagoose
*

Reputation 10
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: '02 Triumph Trophy
Miles Typed: 2240

My Photo Gallery



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #51 on: January 24, 2007, 02:53:45 am »


For my money Canons make the best photos - if we are talking JPEG that is.

I recently purchased a Canon XTi DSLR and I really like it. I bought it because it was small. I take it with me on my FJR and it even fits in my tankbag. For me, the extra size is worth it. However, if you don't want to take something as big as a DSLR their smaller point and shoots are excellent. Also, don't get a DSLR if you aren't willing to put a little time into post processing your images.

Here's one from last Saturday with my Canon



Now THAT is a beautiful image!   Clap
Logged

Ya just whomp dat sucka right up da ol' schmegeggie.
Thunder7
Whompamagoose
*

Reputation 10
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: '02 Triumph Trophy
Miles Typed: 2240

My Photo Gallery



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #52 on: January 24, 2007, 02:55:01 am »


A RAW vs JPEG thread is like a Mobil 1 vs Castrol thread... Lol


I'm going to have to ask you to elaborate on that one.....  Headscratch
Logged

Ya just whomp dat sucka right up da ol' schmegeggie.
XLR8
Does not wear Crocs
*

Reputation 8
Offline Offline

Years Contributed: '07, '08
Motorcycles: C14
GPS: Pacific Northwest
Miles Typed: 4090

My Photo Gallery




Ignore
« Reply #53 on: January 24, 2007, 08:45:03 am »


Now THAT is a beautiful image!   Clap


Thanks Thunder7.  Smile

I realize it is kind of self indulgent and a hijack to post it in this thread but I just wanted to share and talk cameras. I've been shooting film for years and then kind of left the hobby and I only had a digital point and shoot for a long time. Last fall I bought the XTi and at first wondered what had I done? All my exposures were pretty terrible. But it's slowly starting to come back and I think that combining riding with photography will be very enjoyable.
Logged
Thunder7
Whompamagoose
*

Reputation 10
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: '02 Triumph Trophy
Miles Typed: 2240

My Photo Gallery



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #54 on: January 24, 2007, 09:08:59 am »




Thanks Thunder7.  Smile

I realize it is kind of self indulgent and a hijack to post it in this thread but I just wanted to share and talk cameras. I've been shooting film for years and then kind of left the hobby and I only had a digital point and shoot for a long time. Last fall I bought the XTi and at first wondered what had I done? All my exposures were pretty terrible. But it's slowly starting to come back and I think that combining riding with photography will be very enjoyable.


You're welcome. Your path back into it is similar to what mine was. I got out of it for a while, due to many reasons and bought a used Kodak DC 290 back in 2000. I took one shot that made me want to throw the camera in the garbage (Shadow detail was noise at best) and went to an Olympus 5060. I fi=gured that if I was going to have a point and shoot I wanted a good one. After a few months with it the "jones" came back to me like a bolt of lightning and I proceeded to hit every possible wall with that camera. The limitations were killing me.

Next step was a DSLR, which ended up being a used EOS 10D. I had a friend who couldnt handle the fact that I would have a better camera than him so instead of buying a 20D he sold me his 10D with the 28-135 IS zoom and the extended battery pack for $750.00. The rest is history. Riding all day and finding things to shoot is my favorite thing to do. Its like meditation.

Play around with depth of field- I've found it works for me. Uness there are special circumstances, such as shooting indoors with my studio strobes (Full manual with a external flash meter is a MUST) I usually leave the shutter speed to the camera.

Regarding that amazing shot of yours- I love to look at the works of other photographers for one main reason- It keeps me humble about my works. We all see different things, all interpreted through the lens and (sometimes) computers. While I dont claim to be a fan of all shooters works, I respect their vision.

If you get a chance, check out my site. Its way overdue for an update (yeah, yeah- I'm working on it- I swear) but you'll get an idea of what I see.
Logged

Ya just whomp dat sucka right up da ol' schmegeggie.
Jeff
Used to be redsuperhawk
*

Reputation 35
Offline Offline

Years Contributed: '08, '09, '10
Years Supported: '11
Motorcycles: Only a Schwinn but not leaving STN
GPS: Starved Rock is my backyard.
Miles Typed: 3960

My Photo Gallery



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #55 on: January 24, 2007, 09:33:52 am »




Here's one from last Saturday with my Canon



I agree with Thunder7, that photo is awesome!
Posted on: January 24, 2007, 06:33:09 am


If you get a chance, check out my site. Its way overdue for an update (yeah, yeah- I'm working on it- I swear) but you'll get an idea of what I see.


Thunder7, if you need any help with your site, let me know. It's what I do for a living.

Jeff
Logged
JimWilliamson
*

Reputation 30
Offline Offline

Years Contributed: '06, '07, '08, '09, '10
Years Supported: '11
GPS: Fort Collins, CO
Miles Typed: 2486

My Photo Gallery



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #56 on: January 24, 2007, 10:27:54 am »



If you get a chance, check out my site. Its way overdue for an update (yeah, yeah- I'm working on it- I swear) but you'll get an idea of what I see.



Good pix, Good presentation.

http://www.fredteifeld.com/natout/images/sadsilo.html
Looks familiar... Is that silo on US Route 2 just southwest of Rockford IL??

Is this one out at Union IL?
http://www.fredteifeld.com/rr/images/tracks.html
Logged
Thunder7
Whompamagoose
*

Reputation 10
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: '02 Triumph Trophy
Miles Typed: 2240

My Photo Gallery



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #57 on: January 24, 2007, 10:49:56 am »




Good pix, Good presentation.

http://www.fredteifeld.com/natout/images/sadsilo.html
Looks familiar... Is that silo on US Route 2 just southwest of Rockford IL??

Is this one out at Union IL?
http://www.fredteifeld.com/rr/images/tracks.html


Thank you!

First answer- I dont recall. I have been trying to remember for a while now.

Second- Yes.
Logged

Ya just whomp dat sucka right up da ol' schmegeggie.
CBRXXBLACKBIRD
*

Reputation 9
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: 2013 Triumph Explorer & 2007 Speed Triple
GPS: 42.61N -87.86W (Elev. 672 ft)
Miles Typed: 3579

My Photo Gallery


Stealth Wing rider




Ignore
« Reply #58 on: January 24, 2007, 10:56:04 am »


For my money Canons make the best photos - if we are talking JPEG that is.

I recently purchased a Canon XTi DSLR and I really like it. I bought it because it was small. I take it with me on my FJR and it even fits in my tankbag. For me, the extra size is worth it. However, if you don't want to take something as big as a DSLR their smaller point and shoots are excellent. Also, don't get a DSLR if you aren't willing to put a little time into post processing your images.

Here's one from last Saturday with my Canon



That is a awesome photo.
Logged

Joe.

 "I must finally be hitting my 2nd gear shift right, the *&[email protected]! oil light keeps coming on..."
Thunder7
Whompamagoose
*

Reputation 10
Offline Offline

Motorcycles: '02 Triumph Trophy
Miles Typed: 2240

My Photo Gallery



WWW

Ignore
« Reply #59 on: January 24, 2007, 11:01:04 am »




I agree with Thunder7, that photo is awesome!
Posted on: January 24, 2007, 06:33:09 am


Thunder7, if you need any help with your site, let me know. It's what I do for a living.

Jeff


Jeff- Thanks. I appreciate the offer and if I have any questions I will certainly shout out to you. I'll PM wth more, as I dont want to divert this thread any further than we already have  Bigok
Logged

Ya just whomp dat sucka right up da ol' schmegeggie.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 ... 77   Go Up
Print
Jump to:  



ST.N

Copyright © 2001 - 2013 Sport-Touring.Net.
All rights reserved.

 
SimplePortal 2.3.1 © 2008-2009, SimplePortal