The Big Photography Thread

[xKnuckles]

Beautiful, Ken.

[xKnuckles]

That is much clearer Xknuckles , the "Sundog" - good name .

Don't ask me how computer cyber space works, I only know enough to be dangerous

Brett

I don't think I know enough to be dangerous.......not sure what that makes me..... probably just extremely hazardous.....

 

[KenElevenShadows]

 

What do you think about the new iPhone 6s which will have 12 megapixels..... Surely that wouldn't be capable of giving better quality images than an 8 mp canon......or would it?

 

Much of it has to do with what sort of lens there is. Lens is the single most important aspect of a camera, in my opinion, and I would MUCH rather take photos with a fantastic lens and a 10 MP camera than a lousy or mediocre lens and a 24 MP lens.

[xKnuckles]

Cheers Ken. That is worth knowing. I am seriously considering getting a "proper" camera - maybe for Christmas...... Has anybody got any recommendations?

[Joe Muscara]

Great pics Joe. I especially like the one of the buildings - I find such shots quite tricky with my iPhone.

 

Your Canon has only 8 megapixels! That is a huge surprise to me! How old is it?

 

What do you think about the new iPhone 6s which will have 12 megapixels..... Surely that wouldn't be capable of giving better quality images than an 8 mp canon......or would it?

What Ken said is what I was implying by saying "I know pixels aren't everything." Apple has been putting a good effort into their lenses and such so that iPhones do take great pictures. But, they still have their limits vs. a DSLR.

 

My DSLR is the Canon Digital Rebel XT, known in the rest of the world as the EOS 350D. It looks like it came out in late 2006, and I guess I bought mine within a year of that? To be honest, I don't use the poor thing enough to justify upgrading. Also, it takes great pictures as it is. I don't even keep up with the current tech in DSLRs simply to avoid the GAS. Heck, I'd consider using actual film if that didn't mean me having to develop it and all that. And I would. I'm better off staying far away.

 

P.S. Thanks!

[KenElevenShadows]

Cheers Ken. That is worth knowing. I am seriously considering getting a "proper" camera - maybe for Christmas...... Has anybody got any recommendations?

 

It depends on what you want to shoot.

 

I don't have a Fuji XT-1, but a lot of professional photographers have been going on about this lately. http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x_t1/

 

If you are shooting landscape, macro, etc., the Fuji would be a great camera to consider.

 

However, if you are shooting high-speed action or weddings with low light, you might have issues focusing quickly, as it's not as fast as a "traditional" DSLR.

 

Otherwise, check the others - Canon Rebel Series, Nikon D3xx or D5xx, or some of the Sony offerings, as those can all be good choices for you.

 

If you really want to do low light (indoor sports, concert, night photography, etc.), then the full frame Canons, Nikons, or Sony might be really great choices, but you're looking at dropping some major coin for that and the appropriate lens.

[KenElevenShadows]

Great pics Joe. I especially like the one of the buildings - I find such shots quite tricky with my iPhone.

 

Your Canon has only 8 megapixels! That is a huge surprise to me! How old is it?

 

What do you think about the new iPhone 6s which will have 12 megapixels..... Surely that wouldn't be capable of giving better quality images than an 8 mp canon......or would it?

What Ken said is what I was implying by saying "I know pixels aren't everything."

 

Definitely agree, Joe. I think you could draw an analogy to recording digitally. In my opinion, the microphone is sort of like the lens. If you have a horrible microphone for whatever you are recording, it doesn't matter if you are recording at 192kHz. It still will suck. You'll just take up more MG recording it in all its supreme suckage.

 

And so it is with pixels. Sure, high resolution is good. It's more accurate, after all. But the lens shapes the light coming in, and photography is all about light, in my opinion.

 

 

[Joe Muscara]

That's a great analogy, Ken!

[xKnuckles]

To be honest, I don't use the poor thing enough to justify upgrading. Also, it takes great pictures as it is. I don't even keep up with the current tech in DSLRs simply to avoid the GAS. Heck, I'd consider using actual film if that didn't mean me having to develop it and all that. And I would. I'm better off staying far away.

Your camera clearly takes very good pics, Joe, as you have demonstrated before. That is the secret, isn't it........... to get something you are completely happy with and just keep it. I just hope I can manage to do the same.

 

[xKnuckles]

Cheers Ken. That is worth knowing. I am seriously considering getting a "proper" camera - maybe for Christmas...... Has anybody got any recommendations?

 

It depends on what you want to shoot.

 

I don't have a Fuji XT-1, but a lot of professional photographers have been going on about this lately. http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x_t1/

 

If you are shooting landscape, macro, etc., the Fuji would be a great camera to consider.

 

However, if you are shooting high-speed action or weddings with low light, you might have issues focusing quickly, as it's not as fast as a "traditional" DSLR.

 

Otherwise, check the others - Canon Rebel Series, Nikon D3xx or D5xx, or some of the Sony offerings, as those can all be good choices for you.

 

If you really want to do low light (indoor sports, concert, night photography, etc.), then the full frame Canons, Nikons, or Sony might be really great choices, but you're looking at dropping some major coin for that and the appropriate lens.

Thank you so much for these suggestions Ken!! Buying a camera an extremely confusing & scary business when you know as little about it as I. The Fuji one sounds amazing! I love the idea of the physical knobs on it (just like I love them on keyboards... ) I shall read up on your other suggestions also.

[Joe Muscara]

To be honest, I don't use the poor thing enough to justify upgrading. Also, it takes great pictures as it is. I don't even keep up with the current tech in DSLRs simply to avoid the GAS. Heck, I'd consider using actual film if that didn't mean me having to develop it and all that. And I would. I'm better off staying far away.

Your camera clearly takes very good pics, Joe, as you have demonstrated before. That is the secret, isn't it........... to get something you are completely happy with and just keep it. I just hope I can manage to do the same.

Part of the trick is to not think about it. There are features I'd like to have but I don't even know if a replacement would. But I won't even mention them here because I don't want anyone saying, "yes, all current DSLRs have that."

 

I previously used an Olympus 4040, and it was really nice but after a couple of years with that I started to hit its limits. The Canon is still a nice upgrade. I need to bring it with me more, like Mike does his.

[KenElevenShadows]

To be honest, I don't use the poor thing enough to justify upgrading. Also, it takes great pictures as it is. I don't even keep up with the current tech in DSLRs simply to avoid the GAS. Heck, I'd consider using actual film if that didn't mean me having to develop it and all that. And I would. I'm better off staying far away.

Your camera clearly takes very good pics, Joe, as you have demonstrated before. That is the secret, isn't it........... to get something you are completely happy with and just keep it. I just hope I can manage to do the same.

Part of the trick is to not think about it. There are features I'd like to have but I don't even know if a replacement would. But I won't even mention them here because I don't want anyone saying, "yes, all current DSLRs have that."

 

I previously used an Olympus 4040, and it was really nice but after a couple of years with that I started to hit its limits. The Canon is still a nice upgrade. I need to bring it with me more, like Mike does his.

 

You just hit on something that is very important. It doesn't matter how good the camera is if you don't have it with you or if you don't use it much.

 

You want something that you WANT to use all the time.

 

Now what that is differs between people.

 

I mentioned the Fuji for several reasons. It's lighter than a DLSR (and cheaper), but takes great photos. And it has a bunch of the dials right up in the front so there's less scrolling through menus, which kills creativity and time. And since it's smaller and lighter, you're more likely to bring it with you.

 

Also, Fuji has been really great with their firmware updates. Their last firmware update greatly increased the speed that it focuses, among other things. Those are *real* firmware updates, not the kind that Canon or Nikon have, in which they trot them out really slowly, and don't add any features but only seek to fix bugs. Canon and Nikon make great cameras and lens, but they are the old guard, the slow dinosaurs of cameras. Fuji, Panasonic, Sony, Olympus and others....those are the companies that are pushing the boundaries of what a camera is and innovating. Canon and Nikon are following. If these guys were DAWs, Canon and Nikon might be Pro Tools, and Fuji and Sony would be Cuckos Reaper or Ableton.

 

But whatever the camera is, it should be something that you wish to have with you. For some people, that means their smartphone. For others, it's a smartphone with a tiny lens attachment so they have more features and better quality images. For some, it's a small but flexible camera that interchanges lens like the Fuji. And for weirdos like me who run around at night waving flashlights around, a DSLR works well because I can take my time, frame my shot, bump up my ISO really high, have a big-ass lens that gathers a lot of light with its enormous apertures, and so forth (although that said, that Fuji, even though it's a smaller sensor, apparently does really well at low light photography, but focuses slower).

[KenElevenShadows]

Flintstones, meet the Flintstones! Bedrock City is a roadside attraction on the way to the Grand Canyon in Arizona. Roadside attractions were built as "tourist traps" with gift shops and things to do for kids, a place where a family could rest after a long drive on the way to somewhere. Built in 1972, Bedrock City was modeled after "The Flintstones" cartoon from the 1960s. And Bedrock City still survives. For now. Owner Linda Speckels is selling it for $2 million to someone who will keep Bedrock City operating. Bedrock City has a Fredmobile train ride looping through Mt. St. Wilma (a volcano). The Bedrock Theater plays Flintstones cartoons with the audio broadcast over loudspeakers. There's a campsite, diner, convenience store, and a large gift shop. And of course, there is Bedrock City, built to resemble the stone age town of Bedrock from the cartoon "The Flintstones". Will it be here in a year? Who knows.

 

Lightning storms in back of the Flintstones Bedrock City sign in Arizona, on the ay to the Grand Canyon.

 

 

 

[Mike Martin]

Great shot Ken!! Love this.

[Mike Martin]

We had awesome fog the other morning. This image is not colored in any way.

 

Morning Mist by Mike Martin, on Flickr

[Lindaru]

Wow, Ken and Mike . . . great!

 

As for Bedrock City, was there in 2005. Was also at the Grand Canyon the same week. Took a trip in August that year to Las Vegas, Arizona, Utah . . . lots of places we saw and enjoyed including Sedona, Bryce Canyon, the Meteor Crater, Anasazi dwellings, Monument Valley, Lake Havasu and more.

 

I will have to put those pictures up but those were taken on a Sony Mavica (had to have a whole box of 3-1/2 disks as that was what the camera stored everything on).

 

 

[xKnuckles]

Flintstones, meet the Flintstones! Bedrock City is a roadside attraction on the way to the Grand Canyon in Arizona. Roadside attractions were built as "tourist traps" with gift shops and things to do for kids, a place where a family could rest after a long drive on the way to somewhere. Built in 1972, Bedrock City was modeled after "The Flintstones" cartoon from the 1960s. And Bedrock City still survives. For now. Owner Linda Speckels is selling it for $2 million to someone who will keep Bedrock City operating. Bedrock City has a Fredmobile train ride looping through Mt. St. Wilma (a volcano). The Bedrock Theater plays Flintstones cartoons with the audio broadcast over loudspeakers. There's a campsite, diner, convenience store, and a large gift shop. And of course, there is Bedrock City, built to resemble the stone age town of Bedrock from the cartoon "The Flintstones". Will it be here in a year? Who knows.

 

Lightning storms in back of the Flintstones Bedrock City sign in Arizona, on the ay to the Grand Canyon.

 

 

Absolutely incredible, Ken.

So.....presumably this is another long exposure .... how long, may I ask? Are we seeing all the Lightning for the entire storm at once?

 

 

[xKnuckles]

We had awesome fog the other morning. This image is not colored in any way.

 

Morning Mist by Mike Martin, on Flickr

 

Beautiful, Mike.

[xKnuckles]

You just hit on something that is very important. It doesn't matter how good the camera is if you don't have it with you or if you don't use it much.

 

You want something that you WANT to use all the time.

 

Now what that is differs between people.

 

I mentioned the Fuji for several reasons. It's lighter than a DLSR (and cheaper), but takes great photos. And it has a bunch of the dials right up in the front so there's less scrolling through menus, which kills creativity and time. And since it's smaller and lighter, you're more likely to bring it with you.

 

Also, Fuji has been really great with their firmware updates. Their last firmware update greatly increased the speed that it focuses, among other things. Those are *real* firmware updates, not the kind that Canon or Nikon have, in which they trot them out really slowly, and don't add any features but only seek to fix bugs. Canon and Nikon make great cameras and lens, but they are the old guard, the slow dinosaurs of cameras. Fuji, Panasonic, Sony, Olympus and others....those are the companies that are pushing the boundaries of what a camera is and innovating. Canon and Nikon are following. If these guys were DAWs, Canon and Nikon might be Pro Tools, and Fuji and Sony would be Cuckos Reaper or Ableton.

 

But whatever the camera is, it should be something that you wish to have with you. For some people, that means their smartphone. For others, it's a smartphone with a tiny lens attachment so they have more features and better quality images. For some, it's a small but flexible camera that interchanges lens like the Fuji. And for weirdos like me who run around at night waving flashlights around, a DSLR works well because I can take my time, frame my shot, bump up my ISO really high, have a big-ass lens that gathers a lot of light with its enormous apertures, and so forth (although that said, that Fuji, even though it's a smaller sensor, apparently does really well at low light photography, but focuses slower).

 

Thanks again Ken for all this info. It really is extremely helpful to me. BTW.....have you ever considered a career as a salesman?

[RichieP_MechE]

Great advice, Ken, on camera buying. Just one nitpick from me:

I mentioned the Fuji for several reasons. It's lighter than a DLSR (and cheaper)

At $1700 USD for a Fuji X-T1 w/18-55 mm lens, it's cheaper than some DSLRs, but there are a good many below that price range to be considered:

 

Nikon D3200/D5200 with kit lens can be had for under $700 USD

Same with the Canon equivalents - T3/T5/T6

 

Up that to ~$1200 USD and you're into the Nikon D7200/Canon 70D territory, which is getting into the "pro" level of DSLR.

 

The Fuji is really cool though. I love knobby interface!

[KenElevenShadows]

Great advice, Ken, on camera buying. Just one nitpick from me:

I mentioned the Fuji for several reasons. It's lighter than a DLSR (and cheaper)

At $1700 USD for a Fuji X-T1 w/18-55 mm lens, it's cheaper than some DSLRs, but there are a good many below that price range to be considered:

 

Nikon D3200/D5200 with kit lens can be had for under $700 USD

Same with the Canon equivalents - T3/T5/T6

 

Up that to ~$1200 USD and you're into the Nikon D7200/Canon 70D territory, which is getting into the "pro" level of DSLR.

 

The Fuji is really cool though. I love knobby interface!

 

Sorry, I was writing that really fast at work, trying to answer the question quickly.

 

What I meant to say is that it is cheaper than FULL FRAME DSLRs (certainly any that I know of, assuming that we are talking about brand new models and new prices). I mention this because although it has a smaller sensor than full frame DSLRs, the quality is so great that a lot of people who use full frame DSLRs are ditching them in favor of the Fuji XT-1.

 

You'll probably note that I mentioned a number of other DSLRs, including the D3xx, D5xx, and D7xx series of Nikons as well as the Canons, so I definitely am aware that there are a lot of (APS-C) cropped sensor DSLR options out there that are cheaper. After all, I shoot with a Nikon D7000.

 

And these more expensive APS-C sensor cameras can be very nice, such as the D7xx series. They have some pro features, such as the controls for the flash, two SD card bays, and some other features, and would be considered a "high end consumer" model.

 

A high quality used full frame DSLR might be the D700. Although only 12 MP, it is a very very nice camera, and you could score this for cheaper than many new cropped sensor (APS-C sensor) cameras. One must bear in mind, however, that if you go full frame, the lens typically cost more than their APS-C lens counterparts.

 

 

[RichieP_MechE]

Sorry, I was writing that really fast at work, trying to answer the question quickly.

 

What I meant to say is that it is cheaper than FULL FRAME DSLRs (certainly any that I know of, assuming that we are talking about brand new models and new prices).

Ah, yes, now what you wrote makes sense (don't mind me picking nits over here )

[KenElevenShadows]

You just hit on something that is very important. It doesn't matter how good the camera is if you don't have it with you or if you don't use it much.

 

You want something that you WANT to use all the time.

 

Now what that is differs between people.

 

I mentioned the Fuji for several reasons. It's lighter than a DLSR (and cheaper), but takes great photos. And it has a bunch of the dials right up in the front so there's less scrolling through menus, which kills creativity and time. And since it's smaller and lighter, you're more likely to bring it with you.

 

Also, Fuji has been really great with their firmware updates. Their last firmware update greatly increased the speed that it focuses, among other things. Those are *real* firmware updates, not the kind that Canon or Nikon have, in which they trot them out really slowly, and don't add any features but only seek to fix bugs. Canon and Nikon make great cameras and lens, but they are the old guard, the slow dinosaurs of cameras. Fuji, Panasonic, Sony, Olympus and others....those are the companies that are pushing the boundaries of what a camera is and innovating. Canon and Nikon are following. If these guys were DAWs, Canon and Nikon might be Pro Tools, and Fuji and Sony would be Cuckos Reaper or Ableton.

 

But whatever the camera is, it should be something that you wish to have with you. For some people, that means their smartphone. For others, it's a smartphone with a tiny lens attachment so they have more features and better quality images. For some, it's a small but flexible camera that interchanges lens like the Fuji. And for weirdos like me who run around at night waving flashlights around, a DSLR works well because I can take my time, frame my shot, bump up my ISO really high, have a big-ass lens that gathers a lot of light with its enormous apertures, and so forth (although that said, that Fuji, even though it's a smaller sensor, apparently does really well at low light photography, but focuses slower).

 

Thanks again Ken for all this info. It really is extremely helpful to me. BTW.....have you ever considered a career as a salesman?

 

Haha!

 

Really, I would seriously hate sales. I don't have the right personality for it at all. I can't sell my own stuff.

 

 

[KenElevenShadows]

Sorry, I was writing that really fast at work, trying to answer the question quickly.

 

What I meant to say is that it is cheaper than FULL FRAME DSLRs (certainly any that I know of, assuming that we are talking about brand new models and new prices).

Ah, yes, now what you wrote makes sense (don't mind me picking nits over here )

 

I actually do make sense occasionally when I type what I actually mean.

 

 

[KenElevenShadows]

This is an article on light painting photography that some of you might find interesting:

 

Light Painting 101

[Lindaru]

This is an article on light painting photography that some of you might find interesting:

 

Light Painting 101

 

Thank you, Ken! Very informative and something I look forward to trying!

 

[KenElevenShadows]

Cool, I can't wait to see what you create!

[KenElevenShadows]

I'm quite friendly with Lance Keimig, as I just met him earlier this month and went photographing him up at Ancient Bristlecone Pine Forest. And I've had some interaction with Matt Hill Troy Paiva as well.

 

The rest I haven't interacted with, but I know of Steve Harper, who taught a class that had a huge influence on light painters such as Lance and Troy. They're all immensely talented.

 

The other thing I gotta say about night /light painting photographers is that they've been super super nice so far, really friendly and really into their photography.

[Lindaru]

Some very amateur, very basic "light painting" by simply moving the camera at a mildly slow shutter speed. The moon becomes a neon snake and some braided lights join in, and the blur of my trees next to the house make an interesting texture.

 

Me goofing around on a full moon night

 

[xKnuckles]

Hey Linda - nice pictures! You are ahead of me ... I love the idea of light painting (Ken has absolutely sold me on that too..... ) but have not made any attempt at it whatsoever yet. Very interesting to see your efforts.