|
Cameras
Nov 15, 2015 13:20:48 GMT -8
Post by WettCoast on Nov 15, 2015 13:20:48 GMT -8
You can buy weather protection for your camera such as this or this ....
|
|
|
Cameras
Nov 17, 2015 22:21:57 GMT -8
Post by paulvanb on Nov 17, 2015 22:21:57 GMT -8
My Olympus OM-D 5 Mark II is supposedly splashproof along with the 7-14mm lens. But $2,700 is a fair chunk of change to dish out.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,151
|
Post by Neil on Feb 27, 2016 22:57:03 GMT -8
There's plenty of good reasons to prefer driving a stick over an automatic. The advantages of film over digital, however, are less clear. Resolution and latitude - the most important being the much greater dynamic range of film, allowing it to capture a greater range of lights and darks and inbetweeny stuff How about the challenge of composition without the luxury of infinite shots? Along with the two factors you've mentioned, my 24 year old photography buff daughter cites that as why she mainly uses film.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Feb 28, 2016 10:26:48 GMT -8
Resolution and latitude - the most important being the much greater dynamic range of film, allowing it to capture a greater range of lights and darks and inbetweeny stuff How about the challenge of composition without the luxury of infinite shots? Along with the two factors you've mentioned, my 24 year old photography buff daughter cites that as why she mainly uses film. Film is/ was very expensive relative to the cost of each digital image we shoot nowadays. You thought twice before pressing the shutter. Today, with digital, I believe the feeling is that if you click enough times you will get a few decent images. As for film having better resolution & latitude? Maybe that was true back in two thousand & two, but not now. The latest digital sensors found in cameras like the Sony A7rii are absolutely amazing in terms of resolution & dynamic range, and their ability to shoot good images in light that varies from intense sunlight to candle light. How many people here have experience removing an unfinished roll of ASA* 100 film from their camera to replace it with a roll of ASA 800 film so as to shoot photos in lower light, and then later to put the original roll back into the camera use up the unexposed frames? petapixel.com/2015/05/26/film-vs-digital-a-comparison-of-the-advantages-and-disadvantages/*ASA = American Standards Association (now named ANSI) Back in 'the day' film speeds were measured in either ASA (North America & other places, too, I gather) or the German DIN scale for film speeds. The DIN scales was a log scale similar to dB scale used for sound level measurements. A table of equivalents follows: ASA DIN comment very slow film 50 18 100 21 twice as 'fast' as ASA 50 faster film 200 24 4 times as 'fast' as ASA 50 400 27 8 times as 'fast' as ASA 50 800 30 16 times as 'fast' as ASA 50 very 'fast' film 1600 33 32 times as 'fast' as ASA 50 3200 36 ext. 'fast' film 6400 39 128 times as 'fast' as ASA 50
In the 1980's the ASA & DIN scales were combined (in an ISO standard) so that film now displayed a speed of ISO 100/21 or ISO 800/30 (for examples). Somewhere, along the line, the DIN part was dropped. Digital cameras today, as far as I know, only express light sensitivity of the sensor as ISO 100 or ISO 3200 for example. One of the big advantages of digital is that the sensitivity of the sensor is hugely adjustable from ISO 100 (or lower) up to 25,600 (& in some cameras much higher). The sensitivity can be adjusted between shots, whereas with film, you had to change the film. I think the fastest available colour film was maybe ASA 1600.
One last thing about film speed. As film speed increased film 'grain' also increased. An ASA 800 film was 'grainy', the pre-digital equivalent of 'noise'.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,151
|
Post by Neil on Mar 14, 2016 11:24:18 GMT -8
So... why do we take so many photographs? Is it for artistic purposes, or is it to remember things?
An interesting article in a recent edition of Skeptic magazine suggests that taking pictures might actually hinder memory. The article, written by social psychologist Carol Tavris, posits that when you click the button, you're 'out-sourcing' the job of remembering an event to your camera's memory rather than your own. Not to say that you forget it- just that your brain isn't as fully engaged in storing the moment.
Tavris points to an experiment where a psychologist took a group of people to a museum to look at a diverse array of thirty objects. Participants were asked to photograph fifteen items, and observe the other fifteen. Next day, they were given tests to determine how well they remembered all thirty, and it turned out that the items that were observed were remembered better than the items photographed. Not surprising I suppose; it makes sense that when we photograph something, part of our attention is directed toward the act of taking the picture, rather than just the subject itself. Interestingly, when people were asked to zoom in on a specific aspect of an item and shoot it, their memory was unimpaired.
Selfies also came into the equation, in terms of memory. "You see yourself in the scene you're observing rather than being the active recorder of the memory."
The article mentions the uncertainty over how many photographs are taken each year- estimates range from a few billion to nearly a trillion. Why we take so many, I'm not quite sure, and I'm also not sure I agree with its proposition. I know there are some photographs I look at that bring back very specific memories; feelings, even smells. But when I think of those scenes without looking at a photo, I remember them just as well. The artistic aspect of photography is another matter altogether, and one that has a value outside of memory.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Mar 14, 2016 14:39:31 GMT -8
So... why do we take so many photographs? Is it for artistic purposes, or is it to remember things? What might be interesting would be to observe some things today with 50 % of those things being photographed by you. Then, in six months, reviewing the photos of the things you photographed. Then, 6 months again later you were tested on your recollection of all the things you saw (both those photographed & those seen only). Would you be more likely to remember clearly the photographed items because they were seen again (in the photos) during the intervening period? I have often thought about photos that I took three or four decades ago. Do they help me to remember things from way back in the day? I think they do, if those photos are seen again from time to time. I know that photos from way back when can help to settle arguments such as "Did the first Queen of Surrey really have steel docking apparatus added to it fore & aft when it first came to BCF back in the mid 1970's?"
|
|
|
Post by paulvanb on Mar 28, 2016 15:51:24 GMT -8
The software plug-ins I use for processing my images in Lightroom is now free! It used to be $149 US. Click here is the link. The only one I don't really use is Analog EFX Pro. After making my initial edits, a quick post-sharpen in Sharpener Pro followed by an automatic noise reduction in Dfine2. You can do excellent black and white as ell as sepia stuff in Silver EFX Pro2. Enjoy, especially Mr. Horn!
|
|
|
Cameras
Mar 28, 2016 16:55:23 GMT -8
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 28, 2016 16:55:23 GMT -8
The software plug-ins I use for processing my images in Lightroom is now free! It used to be $149 US. Click here is the link. The only one I don't really use is Analog EFX Pro. After making my initial edits, a quick post-sharpen in Sharpener Pro followed by an automatic noise reduction in Dfine2. You can do excellent black and white as ell as sepia stuff in Silver EFX Pro2. Enjoy, especially Mr. Horn! As far as I could tell, you need to already have Adobe Photoshop or Adobe Lightroom, and then this free stuff is just add-ons to that. Let me know if I'm misunderstanding that or not. thanks Paul.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Mar 28, 2016 18:48:22 GMT -8
The software plug-ins I use for processing my images in Lightroom is now free! It used to be $149 US. Click here is the link. The only one I don't really use is Analog EFX Pro. After making my initial edits, a quick post-sharpen in Sharpener Pro followed by an automatic noise reduction in Dfine2. You can do excellent black and white as ell as sepia stuff in Silver EFX Pro2. Enjoy, especially Mr. Horn! As far as I could tell, you need to already have Adobe Photoshop or Adobe Lightroom, and then this free stuff is just add-ons to that. Let me know if I'm misunderstanding that or not. thanks Paul. No, they can be used stand-alone, and they can be used with some non-Adobe products such as the editing & image management software I use, ACDSee. To use stand alone you simply have to open one of the 'exe' files found in each of the 'Nik Collection' functions. It is more convenient to use them from within a program such as Lightroom, however.
|
|
|
Cameras
Mar 28, 2016 20:44:15 GMT -8
Post by Kather Anne on Mar 28, 2016 20:44:15 GMT -8
To use the NIK elements as standalone products you have to drag an image file onto the executable - it does work and the price is right. That being said, I don't use them...
|
|
|
Cameras
Mar 28, 2016 20:57:36 GMT -8
Post by Mike C on Mar 28, 2016 20:57:36 GMT -8
Worth noting that you can also download Photoshop CS2, for free, here: www.adobe.com/ca/downloads/other-downloads.html - click on CS2 and create an Adobe account. Creative suite on a student budget. I am a big fan of Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign.
|
|
|
Cameras
Mar 28, 2016 21:11:50 GMT -8
Post by paulvanb on Mar 28, 2016 21:11:50 GMT -8
Worth noting that you can also download Photoshop CS2, for free, here: www.adobe.com/ca/downloads/other-downloads.html - click on CS2 and create an Adobe account. Creative suite on a student budget. I am a big fan of Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign. The only problem with this solution is how old the camera is you are using if you are processing raw images. I would assume that it is using a very old version of Adobe Camera Raw. But there is a workaround for that too, just use Adobe DNG converter. An extra step or two but free can be good.
|
|
|
Cameras
Apr 17, 2016 0:02:15 GMT -8
Post by Steve Rosenow on Apr 17, 2016 0:02:15 GMT -8
Worth noting that you can also download Photoshop CS2, for free, here: www.adobe.com/ca/downloads/other-downloads.html - click on CS2 and create an Adobe account. Creative suite on a student budget. I am a big fan of Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign. The only problem with this solution is how old the camera is you are using if you are processing raw images. I would assume that it is using a very old version of Adobe Camera Raw. But there is a workaround for that too, just use Adobe DNG converter. An extra step or two but free can be good. I can say with certainty that CS2 will NOT work on cameras manufactured after 2013. And DNG converter might have issues with newer cameras. I just ran into an issue with Adobe Photoshop CS6 and Lightroom 5.5 actually. I had been using CS6 and 5.5 for the better part of about a year and a half. Just recently, I was forced into upgrading cameras. After four years of ownership, my tried-and-trusty Nikon D5100 experienced a cascading wall of failures. The SD card slot failed to read every once in a while, and after a few weeks the problem got worse until the SD card slot wouldn't even recognize the presence of an SD card. Following the near sudden failure of my D5100, I picked up the brand new Nikon D5500. Immediately, I noticed that my versions of Adobe Camera RAW would not support the D5500. DNG converter had issues converting its files, as the D5500 puts out massive 26mb NEF RAW files. So, I opted to upgrade my copies of Photoshop and Lightroom, with upgraded versions of Adobe Camera RAW.
|
|
|
Cameras
May 11, 2016 18:16:04 GMT -8
Post by paulvanb on May 11, 2016 18:16:04 GMT -8
Right now, Adobe is providing Lightroom and Photoshop CC for $9.99 per month. Plan includes web-based apps.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Aug 6, 2016 17:27:21 GMT -8
|
|
|
Cameras
Aug 17, 2016 7:20:55 GMT -8
Post by Kahloke on Aug 17, 2016 7:20:55 GMT -8
My 8 year old Sigma 18-200 lens died on me recently. I was coaxing it along on our Whistler/Vancouver trip last month, but now it's pretty much dead, at least where autofocus is concerned. Sure, I can probably get it fixed, but that lens is a bit of a tank, and I've had my eye on Tamron's much newer and lighter 16-300mm lens for some time, so when I went shopping online to buy it, I actually discovered I could get an almost brand-new Nikon D3300 camera with the stock Nikon 18-55mm lens plus a new 18-250mm lens for not a whole lot more than that Tamron lens alone. Now, I still have an 8 year old Nikon D80 which works just fine even though it is a little banged up and showing some wear and tear. The D3300, in some ways, would be a step down in features, as it is an entry-level DSLR, although camera technology has improved since the D80 came out, and the D3300 has a greater ISO range and higher megapixel count, not that I take too much stock in that, especially since it really comes down to the lens you have, and I can still get good pictures out of my D80. Mostly, I have been wanting a smaller frame for traveling. The D80, while very nice, is a bit bulky at times, and I think the D3300 will be a nice compromise, plus it does video, which was not a feature when the D80 came out. And, the D3300 will still take very good photos, and it will be easier to carry. Besides, I can still hang on to my D80, and probably will, for awhile. So, with all of that, my dilemma this week has been: 1. Do I get the Tamron 16-300mm lens for my D80, which would have the advantage of going wider at the low end, plus the extra zoom out to 300? OR 2. Do I get the Nikon D3300 with stock 18-55mm Nikon lens, and buy the cheaper Sigma 18-250mm lens, essentially replacing my old Sigma, for roughly $100 more than buying that Tamron lens alone, even though I will miss out on the Tamron's ability to go wider? I know, this is such a first-world problem, isn't it? Well, after hemming and hawing for most of this week over my first-world dilemma (oh my! such a rough life ), this morning I finally decided on Option 2. I bought the new D3300 camera and kit lens (the Nikon 18-55), plus Sigma's 18-250mm lens, which is actually a lot lighter than my old Sigma lens. I liked that lens, but it was definitely a tank. So, no, I won't be able to get down to 16mm (really, 24mm after you factor in the focal length conversion), but I never really had any problems with the 18mm (27mm actual) starting point, and by the time you get out to 300mm, you really need a tripod, which I do have. But I don't always take it with me when I travel. So, there it is. I have a new camera coming which I am planning on using as my primary traveling rig. I know some of you may ask, why didn't I buy a 55-200, or even a 55-300 mm lens, to compliment the stock 18-55mm lens coming with the new camera? I know a 2 lens setup is often the best way to go, especially with picture quality - you don't have the vignetting and distortion issues that compromise a lot of ultra-long zoom lenses. That may be true, but for me, it's about convenience. I like a single lens that I don't have to swap out all of the time, and I was pretty happy with my previous 18-200mm lens, even knowing the compromises, so I think I will be pretty happy with this setup, too.
|
|
|
Post by Queen of Nanaimo Teen on Aug 17, 2016 7:30:27 GMT -8
I don't claim to know much about cameras, but the most recent photos that I have posted in the last week are from my newly purchased Nikon D3300. I am really happy with it, and I believe that the quality of the photos speaks for that as well!
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Aug 17, 2016 8:16:16 GMT -8
I don't claim to know much about cameras, but the most recent photos that I have posted in the last week are from my newly purchased Nikon D3300. I am really happy with it, and I believe that the quality of the photos speaks for that as well! Glad to know you like your D3300. Most of the time I am just doing point-and-shoot in landscape mode. Only once in a while to I delve into the more advanced settings and go manual. Night shots tend to be when I do that, and at that point, I am using a tripod. 99% of my camera use is when traveling and walking around. Having a lighter rig than my D80 is the primary reason I went this route. Can't wait to get it now. It should be arriving next week.
|
|
|
Cameras
May 19, 2017 10:56:24 GMT -8
Post by Charles on May 19, 2017 10:56:24 GMT -8
Hey Scott, if you don't mind me asking what type of camera do you use and what resolution of picture can it take because the pictures look beautiful!
|
|
|
Cameras
May 19, 2017 11:52:53 GMT -8
Post by Scott on May 19, 2017 11:52:53 GMT -8
Hey Scott, if you don't mind me asking what type of camera do you use and what resolution of picture can it take because the pictures look beautiful! Thank you, Charles. My main camera is a 36.3 megapixel Nikon D800 equipped with a Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8, Nikon 50mm f/1.4 or a Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II lens.
|
|
|
Post by Charles on Dec 31, 2017 13:03:08 GMT -8
I finally got a camera! Well actually I'm borrowing it from my grandpa but he never uses it and he said just take it and be careful! It is a Nikon Coolpix P510 with 16 Megapixels, and it takes so much clearer photos than my iPhone 5c. I still like my iPhone for just anywhere and it got me into photography but still YES!!! Here are a few of my best shots with it (they aren't great but it was fun trying to take them) DSCN0657 by Charlie.Toth, on Flickr DSCN0666 by Charlie.Toth, on Flickr DSCN0670 by Charlie.Toth, on Flickr DSCN0672 by Charlie.Toth, on Flickr
|
|
|
Cameras
Apr 28, 2018 15:34:20 GMT -8
Post by paulvanb on Apr 28, 2018 15:34:20 GMT -8
Camera decision time. I have two Olympus E-M5 MK II bodies and assorted lenses for work. Also have a Canon 70D with an assortment of lenses for work. 2 1/2 weeks ago I bought a Canon 6D with a 24-105mm L lens on sale for $2k. For me to use this for work I need to buy a 12/14-24mm lens with a price tag upwards to $2k. This camera is still sitting inside the box! I have been wanting a full frame camera for awhile. Some of my lenses for the 70D will work with the new camera. I have been doing time lapse photography, and my existing cameras have been doing the job. I am having mixed feelings about the new camera after buying it. Not sure what to do. I am looking for some suggestions here. Thank you in advance.
|
|
|
Cameras
Apr 28, 2018 22:29:19 GMT -8
Post by WettCoast on Apr 28, 2018 22:29:19 GMT -8
Camera decision time. I have two Olympus E-M5 MK II bodies and assorted lenses for work. Also have a Canon 70D with an assortment of lenses for work. 2 1/2 weeks ago I bought a Canon 6D with a 24-105mm L lens on sale for $2k. For me to use this for work I need to buy a 12/14-24mm lens with a price tag upwards to $2k. This camera is still sitting inside the box! I have been wanting a full frame camera for awhile. Some of my lenses for the 70D will work with the new camera. I have been doing time lapse photography, and my existing cameras have been doing the job. I am having mixed feelings about the new camera after buying it. Not sure what to do. I am looking for some suggestions here. Thank you in advance. Are you staying with Canon or thinking of changing brands, or even type of camera (going mirrorless, for example)?
|
|
|
Cameras
Apr 29, 2018 8:01:38 GMT -8
Post by paulvanb on Apr 29, 2018 8:01:38 GMT -8
Camera decision time. I have two Olympus E-M5 MK II bodies and assorted lenses for work. Also have a Canon 70D with an assortment of lenses for work. 2 1/2 weeks ago I bought a Canon 6D with a 24-105mm L lens on sale for $2k. For me to use this for work I need to buy a 12/14-24mm lens with a price tag upwards to $2k. This camera is still sitting inside the box! I have been wanting a full frame camera for awhile. Some of my lenses for the 70D will work with the new camera. I have been doing time lapse photography, and my existing cameras have been doing the job. I am having mixed feelings about the new camera after buying it. Not sure what to do. I am looking for some suggestions here. Thank you in advance. Are you staying with Canon or thinking of changing brands, or even type of camera (going mirrorless, for example)? I will be keeping my two Olympus cameras, but unsure about the Canon 6d. Price is awesome for what you are getting. The lens, by itself is about $1,400.
|
|
|
Cameras
Jul 24, 2018 14:07:22 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by Charles on Jul 24, 2018 14:07:22 GMT -8
Hello, does anyone have knowledge about Canon’s 6D camera? I try to record a video for 20 seconds and it will just cut out and say video has been automatically stopped. I know that the SD card is high quality so I don’t know why it would just cut out. Please PM me I f you can
|
|