Digital photography

[imamartian]

I'm about to take the plunge into DSLR technology, and obviously Canon and their EOS range seem to "be up there"... how do they differentiatie between their models numbers...

7D seems to be top of the range, (not 1000D?) and 5D? 550D?

I will research it, but wondered of anyone had a quick guide?

Also, where do i start with lenses?

 

[wreckedit]

This might help

//www.diynot.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=834423#834423

Also.

http://fwd.five.tv/gadget-show/bestbuys/digital-cameras

Also, buy the lens which has been made for the camera however there are exceptions.

 

[imamartian]

thanks wreckedit...

so is 18MP really the max needed for pro shots? and should i worry about FPS? etc

 

[wreckedit]

Honestly Im, I have just taken a look at your albums and do you think that an 18mp camera would have made them any better. Not really.

I cannot help you with the technicalities of cameras because they are like Mac laptop computers and can take years to master.
The sort of camera is not always the answer. Its what you do with it.
The best candid shots are about being in the right place at the right time.The camera doesn't matter.
I always feel the best camera is the one you have with you most of the time.
I have 2 which are always with me and have been the most fun. The phone and an Olympus Dig. I bought in a boot sale.
What subjects are you interested in and your ability? That should be the dictate for your camera needs. Not its mps.
What photo's are you going to take that needs a pro. camera for?

 

[ladylola]

Honestly Im, I have just taken a look at your albums and do you think that an 18mp camera would have made them any better. Not really.

Perfectly true wrecky, indeed for most uses such as veiwing on a computer or "standard" size prints then 3mp is more than adequate.
18mp will allow you to make huge prints if you want or crop very finely.
Many people get obsested with the amount of megapixels when the really important factor is sensor size.
The 7D is an expensive camera to start with although the canon system does include both crop and full frame bodies.
The good thing about canon is their registar distance, or sensor plane to lens distance, and their wide mouth all of which means that you will be able to use a wide range of old glass, such as zeiss, takumars ,rokkors, aand tamrons all of which produce supberb images at a fraction of the cost of new canon glass. Adaptors for different mounts are readily available on e-bay.
Oh and whatever camera you buy for God's sake don't just set the dial to P and autofocus, focus it manually and shoot in manual exposure mode!

 

[Donkmeister]

Oh and whatever camera you buy for God's sake don't just set the dial to P and autofocus, focus it manually and shoot in manual exposure mode!

Definitely! Out of all the people I know with DSLRs, only 2 of them have read the user manual beyond the "Quick Start" page, and one 1 of those 2 has taken any sort of instruction on how to actually use one. For me it's the photographic equivalent of buying a £100 bottle of wine and then drinking it out of a polystyrene cup with a straw.

I'm more of a happy-snapper than someone who will take "proper" pictures, so I thoroughly researched compact cameras and got the one with the biggest sensor area and best optics that I could afford, along with a few choice programmes I knew I would use (very long exposures and processing for night images, the ability to use RAW images, decent video quality in case I'm on holiday and lose my camcorder)

There seem to be 3 times in a lifetime that people buy SLR cameras:

1) when they're expecting children
2) when they're retired
3) if they're in the pre-kids-but-got-up-to-a-decent-income level

 

[opps]

one of my clients has got to the stage in his life where he would rather teach people to use their dslr rather than cabinet making- I am sure that he would be willing to offer free advice-

the url is

http://www.phototuition.net/index.html


His paid for couses are aimed at starters but photography has been a life long passion. His name is John Perkins. email him if you want

 

[joe-90]

In the old days you only had a handful of pictures to take and they were expensive to develop. Today you just keep on snapping and sooner or later you get good shots. It's not art though.

 

[ladylola]

I'll agree that it's possible to just keep shooting with digital, indeed it has been called the ultimate in hit and miss photography.
The cost is something that is often misquoted as most comparisons are unequeal. To actually print up your digital shots would be very very expensive, most are content to stick them on their computer and leave it at that. Shoting a roll or so a fortnight of film then the economys of digital don't really come into play , it's pros and serious amatures where the costs become apparent. Has our martian friend already got a film SLR? If so then the cost of a DSLR would buy a lot of film for it.
As to it being or not being art, that's very subjective. I'll agree most isn't but the tools be they a camera , paint and brushes or hammer and chisel are really only a small part of artisty, imagination and vision are 99% of it. And just because a picture is painted doesn't make it art either. Go to any statley home and you will see wall after wall of paintings of the first earl , second earl , third earl and on and on, not art just representations , and then there's all the modern stuff, you know a black canvas with a few streaks of yellow down it and a four figure price tag.
I feel the art comes from actually convincing people that it IS art and charging them that four figure price tag
Anyway here's one for you ,an exhibition of photography at the V&A museum. Photography but no cameras.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11521919

 

[wreckedit]

Im, Im, were are you. Come on let us know what you think!

I think Ladylola knows a lot.

We're trying to help you.

Come on say something.

 

[opps]

In the old days you only had a handful of pictures to take and they were expensive to develop. Today you just keep on snapping and sooner or later you get good shots. It's not art though.

On a serious note, a lot of those photos still exist. In part because of the cost/inconvenience (you were more likely to treat the final product with reverence) and because of the materials used to print them.

Now we store the images on cds which age, hard drives which fail and print with inks that fade.

 

[imamartian]

I'm here Wreck, reading your responses with interest.

I have a couple of digital cameras already, but want to start experimenting with different lenses. Plus i really need to learn how to use them properly.

 

[wreckedit]

Hi again.

Look Im, I know where you'll be hanging out with the others I would join you but you're all so effing abusive and I'm not like that.
I hope that Tony guy knows what he's doing

 

[ajstoneservices]