Photographers: tips, tricks, equipment, etc

[Triguy]

Originally Posted by f1100turbo

Albeit the gray clouds and fog may have been self induced. .......

Lol A little bit of both?

[TURBS]

Originally Posted by Triguy

Lol A little bit of both?

Just plain ..... yes

[Oakman]

The Gold Finches are beginning to lose their winter feathers and starting to take on their bright yellow color. Spring is coming.

[dwaynerz]

alright camera gurus, experts and weekend warriors. i would like to get back into photography after a many year absence. i used to have a 35mm ricoh slr until somebody decided it would look better in their possesion. with all the digital cameras out there, are slr cameras dinosaurs? or do they make digital cameras that look/operate like slrs? i could look all this up i know, but getting someones opinion is almost like having someone shop with me. any recommendations? i do NOT want to spend 1000's of dollars, but a decent camera in the low to mid 100's range.

[Oakman]

I'm no camera guru but Canon and Nikon make SLR's called DSLR (Digital Single Lens Reflex). Prices usually start around $450 and can go up to thousands from there. If you go to a pro sports game, all those photographers are using DSLRs.

[prof_fate]

Film is dead. While you can still get it and get it processed printed you might as well try and ride from DC to anchorage on a steam train or horse and buggy. It can be done, but it's going to be very hard.

So...
digital is king. Yes, there are SLR's that are digital - TONS of them. For your budget you'll need to go used.
Canon is what I'm familiar with but as a full time pro I'm out of the loop on what the current 'consumer' model is.
A used canon 40D (2 models back) can be had for $175ish. A Rebel (many models) is canon't consumer dSLR. (the XXd is their mid grade line - 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60D models. 40d and up are good). The Xd (5, 7, 1d models are the pro models).

Some of the pro models are 'full frame' (as in full 35mm film size). All the others are 'crop' cameras - smaller sensor. 99% of the time you won't care. Where you'll see it is the way the lens works - a film camera had a 28-80 lens. On a full frame (FF) dSLR it is a 28-80 lens. On a 'crop' body the frame is smaller and centered - so it's like you cropped in the picture. So a 28-80 will give you the same field of view as a 45-120 lens, give or take a bit depending on the brand of camera. great for zoom lenses not so great for wide angle.

lenses come in 3 grades - 'consumer' like the kit lens, the 50 1.8, etc. These lenses are inexpensive due to lots of plastic, slow focus, inexpensive lenses and coatings. Under $200/lens generally.

Mid grade are $250ish to $900ish in cost, and with canon most are 'USM' lenses (a type of focus motor). Better build,better glass, better coatings - better images (color, contrast, faster focus).

Pro grade (aka "L" lenses) are $1200 and up - some go WAY up. You get better build, better optics, weather sealing, constant aperture, etc.

On a beautiful day with a flower every camera does pretty good. Now make it 9 pm and raining and have the subject be a moving athlete and now you need every bit of light and focus you can get.

So what you need depends on what you want to use it for and how much money you have.

YOu will also want a computer. I'd say need, but it's not 100% necessary. A new camera will come with software to download and do some basic editing, like crop/straighten, sharpen, white balance/color correction, etc.

Originally Posted by dwaynerz

alright camera gurus, experts and weekend warriors. i would like to get back into photography after a many year absence. i used to have a 35mm ricoh slr until somebody decided it would look better in their possesion. with all the digital cameras out there, are slr cameras dinosaurs? or do they make digital cameras that look/operate like slrs? i could look all this up i know, but getting someones opinion is almost like having someone shop with me. any recommendations? i do NOT want to spend 1000's of dollars, but a decent camera in the low to mid 100's range.

[RubenZ]

I've been a long time DSLR user. I've had everything from Canon 20D, 30D, 40D, 7D, 1DIII, 1DIV and now I have a 5D and 5D Mark III. I've been in love with the 5D and 5D111 for a while now but I have to say for all time RV'ing and Traveling the NEW mirror-less cameras coming out from all the manufactures are pretty hard to beat. They are small in size and their image detail and sharpness packs a punch. Way better than toting around the heavier slr cameras.

[Triguy]

Hi Dwayne.

Here's my take.

While film isn't exactly dead; its not really very practical anymore and is only used by a small number of enthusiasts and professionals. SLRs are really cheap but you will be buying them used and then there's the film, developing and so on. It was a pain then and I can't ever see myself going back.

So, DSLR or digital is the way to go.

I think it would cost $500-$1,000 to get into a new beginner DSLR with kit lens, so one idea would be to buy used instead of new. You might be able to find a used DSLR with a kit lens for close to your price at a local camera store. Frankly, it might have the quality and features that we would have died for in an SLR even 15 years ago. So, used is the way to go if you are at mid-$100's.

Not a DSLR, but consider that there is a group of cameras called super-zoom cameras that do not have interchangeable lenses that offer a great value. They can resemble point and shoots or compact DSLRs from the outside but pack absolutely enormous zoom ranges. You will have some/most of the manual controls of a DSLR but only the one lens that is fixed to the camera; which eventually shows its limitations. Until then, you have a great camera to re-learn photography.

[MtnGuy]

Originally Posted by dwaynerz

i do NOT want to spend 1000's of dollars, but a decent camera in the low to mid 100's range.

DSLRs are the same as a 35mm SLR....... except is is digital instead of film. What you see in the view finder is actually looking through the lens. Most have interchangeable lens, which most of the point and shoot cameras do not have that option. I don't think you will find any DSLRs in the low to mid 100s, unless you can work out a deal on an used, older model. DSLRs start in the $500 range and head out of site from there.

Compact digital point and shoot digital cameras have come a long way. I bought a Canon SX260 HS before Christmas for $199. That puppy comes close to rivaling my Canon Rebel T1i DSLR for picture quality. With the 20x optical zoom, it reaches out close to what my Rebel 75-300mm telephoto lens can do. The SX260 differs in many of the shooting options compared to the Rebel, but has some unique 1s at that.

If I had to choose between just 1 of my Canons, I think I would go with the SX260 HS. Easy to use, and small enough to be carried conveniently in my pocket.

[Triguy]

Originally Posted by RubenZ

I have to say for all time RV'ing and Traveling the NEW mirror-less cameras coming out from all the manufactures are pretty hard to beat. They are small in size and their image detail and sharpness packs a punch. Way better than toting around the heavier slr cameras.

I agree. Love my nex 7 and am DSLR-free

[jjdcamper]

Originally Posted by dwaynerz

alright camera gurus, experts and weekend warriors. i would like to get back into photography after a many year absence. i used to have a 35mm ricoh slr until somebody decided it would look better in their possesion. with all the digital cameras out there, are slr cameras dinosaurs? or do they make digital cameras that look/operate like slrs? i could look all this up i know, but getting someones opinion is almost like having someone shop with me. any recommendations? i do NOT want to spend 1000's of dollars, but a decent camera in the low to mid 100's range.

Dwayne:
In my opinion, the first question you should ask yourself is what do I want to take pictures of? Cameras are a lot like computers. Most people who own computers, which is just about everyone today, over bought. They don't use half the options that are available. And then there are some who under bought and try and play the high end games that are loaded with graphics and they wonder why their computer is so slow and the computer is not upgrade-able, so they are stuck in the middle.The decision has to be made before you plunk down your money. The average guy doesn't use half the options that are available on their cameras. It's all a matter of what kind of photography you want to do. And once you decide, don't buy cheap! In cameras, you get what you pay for. If you read some of the posts on this thread, you'll see. People show me photos all the time and if those photos were mine, I'd throw them away. They are terrible. But that's me. I'm my own worst critic when it comes to photography.
I'm not going to tell what brand or model to buy but just think it through first. You'll be glad you did in the long run. If you go on this web site, you'll see a whole host of cameras at all different prices and options. They have a very knowledgeable staff and they'll help you decide. The URL is: bhphoto.com
Jim

[jjdcamper]

Looking for some help:
I have a Nikon D5100 DSLR and I have a question, which I can't find the answer to in the user's manual.

If I set the Mode Dial to "Close Up", how can I set the aperture to a specific setting?
Thanks,
Jim

[Triguy]

Originally Posted by jjdcamper

If I set the Mode Dial to "Close Up", how can I set the aperture to a specific setting?
Thanks,
Jim

Hi Jim,
That's Nikon's Macro scene mode, no? If so, then most scene modes are what they are and do not allow manual adjustments. Maybe Nikon is different in this way, but Sony would not let me adjust the aperture while in Macro scene mode.

[jjdcamper]

Originally Posted by Triguy

Hi Jim,
That's Nikon's Macro scene mode, no? If so, then most scene modes are what they are and do not allow manual adjustments. Maybe Nikon is different in this way, but Sony would not let me adjust the aperture while in Macro scene mode.

Triguy:
Yes, that is a macro setting but I'm concerned that in bright sunlight, the camera will pick an aperture setting, like F/8 or F/16 and put the background in focus. I want to keep the aperture wide open but I'm afraid my camera won't allow me to set both. My old Nikon N90, film camera, had a Depth of Field Preview button I could press and see if the background was in focus or not but I guess Nikon did away with that option when digital came along. I have a lens for my old camera that had a macro setting and I could set the camera on Aperture Priority and it worked out fine. Oh well, one of the drawbacks to digital photography.
Thanks for the reply. C'mon warm weather! I'm anxious to try my new camper.
Jim

[Triguy]

I know precisely what you mean, Jim. And, agree, I would much prefer to control the aperture to get that creamy bokah effect. Tell the truth, I rarely use the scenes because of these limitations and stick to PASM. I'm comfortable in manual most of the time.

[jjdcamper]

Originally Posted by Triguy

I know precisely what you mean, Jim. And, agree, I would much prefer to control the aperture to get that creamy bokah effect. Tell the truth, I rarely use the scenes because of these limitations and stick to PASM. I'm comfortable in manual most of the time.

Triguy:

This afternoon, I'm going to try setting the camera on "Aperture Priority", and select the aperture I want and see if I can focus down to the same distance I got when in
"Close Up" mode. In "Close Up" mode, the depth of field was about 1", but that was indoors and the camera did use a wide open aperture due to the low light level in the house. I'm not sure if by setting Aperture Priority it will change how close I can get to the subject. I might also try totally manual. I don't trust my vision for focusing anymore because of my age and bad eyesight, but the camera does have an in focus/out of focus indicator, which I hope will work in Manual mode. (I wish they would come back with the old Split Image Range Finder, as well as auto focus.) That I could handle even with bad vision. My first 3 or 4 SLR's were totally manual so getting off "Auto" doesn't scare me.
45 degrees today. Still too cold to go camping! I'm a warm to hot weather guy. That's why I moved here from upstate N.Y. and the weather is just not cooperating!
Jim

[MtnGuy]

Originally Posted by jjdcamper

I might also try totally manual. I don't trust my vision for focusing anymore because of my age and bad eyesight, but the camera does have an in focus/out of focus indicator, which I hope will work in Manual mode. (I wish they would come back with the old Split Image Range Finder, as well as auto focus.) That I could handle even with bad vision. My first 3 or 4 SLR's were totally manual so getting off "Auto" doesn't scare me.

As far as vision in manual mode, it does takes 20/20 to get the correct focus.........if you haven't adjusted the view finder diopter setting. I learned this the hard way by taking some pictures with my glasses off, and the pictures were blurry. I was using the lens to correct my vision. On my camera, I have 1 of the little red dots light up and a beep sound when I have something in focus in manual mode. I was wondering why those didn't go off when I had my glasses off.

If I would continually take pictures with my glasses off, then I would adjust the view finder diopter wheel to allow for that.

In my old non-automatic focus 35mm, I also had the split image focusing. I don't know how practical that would be now when most shots are auto-focus.

Originally Posted by jjdcamper

Triguy:
My old Nikon N90, film camera, had a Depth of Field Preview button I could press and see if the background was in focus or not but I guess Nikon did away with that option when digital came along.

I think the DOF preview button is still offered on many DSLRs. I have that on my entry level Rebel t1i. I think is still offered on the higher end Nikons.

[Oakman]

I'm thinking all you photography gurus must drink coffee out of a mug like this.

[MtnGuy]

Originally Posted by Oakman

I'm thinking all you photography gurus must drink coffee out of a mug like this.

Actually, the missus gave me a similar cup a couple of years ago for Christmas.

Mine doesn't have the sippy lid......just a "lens cover"......now I feel slighted.

[prof_fate]

macro mode is for CLOSE UP photography - as in your lens will be an inch or so from teh subject (bug, flower, etc)

There is a relationship between distance from lens and depth of field (DOF) and the background. More info here Online Depth of Field Calculator

In macro shooting with the subject soooo close to the camera your DOG is TINY - so you need F16 and more to get anything usable in focus. Most SLR lenses only go to F22 but macro lenses to to at least F32, some more than that - for that reason.

Now at F32 it's dark - so the shutter speed slows down or else you need A LOT of light - and a tripod.

Originally Posted by jjdcamper

Triguy:
Yes, that is a macro setting but I'm concerned that in bright sunlight, the camera will pick an aperture setting, like F/8 or F/16 and put the background in focus. I want to keep the aperture wide open but I'm afraid my camera won't allow me to set both. My old Nikon N90, film camera, had a Depth of Field Preview button I could press and see if the background was in focus or not but I guess Nikon did away with that option when digital came along. I have a lens for my old camera that had a macro setting and I could set the camera on Aperture Priority and it worked out fine. Oh well, one of the drawbacks to digital photography.
Thanks for the reply. C'mon warm weather! I'm anxious to try my new camper.
Jim