doktoratomik
|
Re: EOS 350D
Dec 02, 2005, 10:41
|
I was actually talking about the D70 when I said it was flimsier than I was expectin!
Yeah, the leap in image quality when using a decent lense is off the scale. I was perfectly satisfied with the pictures I was taking until I purchased my first pricey lense. I never used the kit lense though, so I can't comment specifically on that. Also, for megalithy photography, a polarising filter is worth its weight in gold.
|
Moth
|
Re: Which type of camera do we use?
Dec 02, 2005, 10:42
|
Same here. Mucha affection for zenits.
Can't say I miss it tho!
love
Moth
|
CianMcLiam
|
Now there's a can of worms!
Dec 02, 2005, 11:26
|
Maybe my monitor needs calibrating, but it does look more orange than red on my PC! The other thing is that if this photo, which is not enhanced, should be put in a seperate section like 'magic realism' then all black and white photos should go into this genre automatically too, since the sky is never black and grass is never grey. Using B&W film or converting a digital photo to B&W is one of the most extreme manipulations you can make. I use much much more subtle touches in photoshop on colour photos. Maybe thats why I'm a little touchy about the idea that all my photos are in some way faked, comapred to B&W photos they are much more closer to reality.
I used RAW mode on my camera which means in the Nikon software I can pick a point on the photo (in this case a certain part of the stone) and tell the software 'this should be grey'. From that the software can then work out all the other colours exactly so the final colour is exactly as it was at that time. If I had brought a grey card and taken a photo with that in it then it would be slightly more accurate but not by a whole lot.
|
StoneLifter
|
Re: Now there's a can of worms!
Dec 02, 2005, 12:06
|
|
Well I've got one of your pictures as a desktop so there's no criticism involved - just an observation. I must look at that a great deal ! There should be a branch of philosophy dedicated to photography as the whole process of capturing a flat image involves so many conventions of perception and, again, this monitor's not calibrated for colour space so what I am seeing will probably not be the standard. Thanks for the reminder !
|
ocifant
|
Re: Which type of camera do we use?
Dec 02, 2005, 14:00
|
|
As a Canon EOS300D user, I'd agree. The Canon certainly struggles to cope with a wide range of contrast, to the extent that I actually regret getting rid of my old Oly E10 at times...
|
goffik
|
Re: Which type of camera do we use?
Dec 02, 2005, 14:36
|
And, of course, my trusty SonyEricsson K750i! Taken some cracking photos with that!
G x
|
morfe
|
Re: Which type of camera do we use?
Dec 02, 2005, 16:01
|
|
What's the main problem with the Canon, Hob? I use an older model and get superb clarity, haven't cleaned the sensor in 3 years neever!
|
morfe
|
Re: Which type of camera do we use?
Dec 02, 2005, 16:16
|
"I always carried a manual, doesn't need a battery if you have a light meter"
Check the selenium metering system...
http://www.olympus-trip.co.uk/
Got a mint one for a fiver, it's lovely.
|
morfe
|
Re: Don't mind talking cameras!
Dec 02, 2005, 18:05
|
"I bought 2 1800mAh batteries off ebay for just over half the cost of a Canon 1100mAh battery fom ebay."
Could you send me link old bean? Do they last as good as the originals? I used to get about 1000 shots/day's shooting off've two , but lately they're lasting an hour at best :-(
oothefackizzee (at) morfe (dot) co (dot) uk
|
Chris Collyer
|
Re: Which type of camera do we use?
Dec 02, 2005, 21:01
|
Hmmm, I feel all inadequate now. The only camera I use these days is a Fuji Finepix 2800 – 2 megapixel but with a 6x optical zoom.
I've got an old Olympus OM10 which I used to love, it's simple and no fuss, and an old Pentax (not sure which model) that I've never really got along with. I got fed up with carting all three cameras around so it's just the digital now.
-Chris
|
