BEST CAMERAS, BETTER POSSIBILITIES (UNFAIR COMP)

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

09/04/2003 01:00:08 AM · #29

A photographer friend went to dinner one night and took 2 of his photos to give the host as a little gift. When she opened the photos she looked at them and said "These are lovely photographs, you must have a very expensive camera.
After dinner when he was leaving he found the hostess and told her "That was a very good dinner, you must have really expensive pots."
Hopefully she got the point.

tragicharpy

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

09/04/2003 02:05:31 AM · #30

maybe you should look around before you say its unfair, just go look at the Â£300 cameras like the fuji 3800 or s304 and notice the ribbon, then go look at the digital slrs you will notice the pics are just as good. the competition is great the way it is

sonnyh

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

09/04/2003 02:09:23 AM · #31

I agree --the challenges are for good photography not good cameras. A good photographer can take good pictures from any camera but a good camera cannot make a good photographer. I'm starting to confuse myself --I must be getting tired. Good night all!

Koriyama

Nikon D200

Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f2.8D

09/04/2003 02:17:17 AM · #32

It would be informative if someone with a fair amount of experience with both a top-rate digital slr and a prosumer (heck! even consumer model) would construct a list of things that only the better camera could do.

I'm sure it would be pretty short...

xhoss

Kodak DX6490

09/04/2003 03:11:20 AM · #33

OK. The person who started this thread is the same newbie who was complaining about the lack of creativity in the oops challenge. See here: //www.dpchallenge.com/forum.phpaction=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=42108

Hey newbie - why don't you just quit complaining and have some fun? You don't HAVE to be here. Not even ONE challenge completed and your trying to stir things up.

Help, Help I'm being oppressed!!!

Some of us find this photography thing fun.

jimmythefish

Canon EOS-10D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

09/04/2003 03:19:54 AM · #34

Originally posted by Koriyama:

OK, since I have a F717 and a 10D I'll bite. It won't be comprehensive, but here you go. Reasons why the 10D is better (for me, and note that the F717 is better than the 10D in many ways, which is why I still have it and use it):

1. Shallow depth of focus. This was probably reason #1 for buying the 10D. The increased sensor size means that there's a good deal less depth of focus at a given focal length and aperture. Great for the sports I do. The F717 has a max. shutter speed of 1/1000th of a second, which means that I couldn't shoot portraits outside while using a large aperture. With the 10D I can increase the shutter speed to 1/4000th if needed, and/or stop down a bit (because of the larger sensor size) and still get a shallower depth of field than the F717 wide open.

2. Very low noise at high ISO. This means usable photos in dimmer conditions than what's possible with the F717. With my 50 1.4 and ISO 1600 I can get proper available-light exposure in way, way less light than my F717.

3. Fast autofocus. Servo autofocus allows you to track moving objects and keep them in focus. Autofocus in a sports situation is a nightmare with an F717.

4. Continuous shooting. The F717 blacks out during a burst of three, and then waits for ~9 seconds before another burst is available. With the 10D, I can shoot 3fps for 9 RAW frames and then keep shooting another shot every second for quite a few more frames after that. The buffer clears faster than the F717. The continuous mode function is actually functional on the 10D. On the F717 it's guesswork.

5. Shoot in RAW and save some of the exposure decisions until afterwards. I know a lot of prosumer cameras can do this, but not the F717. I can adjust white balance, sharpness, colour tone and hue, contrast etc. after the fact (while processing the images) rather than living with the decision while shooting with the F717.

6. Reliable manual focus. A real optical viewfinder! The manual focus in the F717 is barely usable.

7. Wider range of lenses.

8. Exposure compensation for both the flash and the ambient metering. I can set the flash exposure and the scene exposure separately. Gold if you're doing portraits.

9. No menus! Almost all photographic functions are available through one button and you can control that (when you get good) through pushing buttons while shooting, and not scrolling through menus.

KevinRiggs

Canon EOS-1Ds

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

09/04/2003 04:22:29 AM · #35

PreScript - If I'm verbose, it could be because its 4:00 or so and I've been up for the last couple of hours with a teething baby. But on the bright side, when she finally got back to sleep, I just had to check DPC. Won't the people at work appreciate that dedication tomorrow?
CHUCKLE

Originally posted by jimmythefish:

There are two camps of people who trade up to 'better' cameras:

1. Those who have mastered their current camera and have specific needs which only a camera with that feature will meet.

2. Those who think that a more expensive camera will make them a better photographer.

I think you might have overlooked at least one group of people. Some of us upgrade for personal enjoyment. Anyone who's seen my work knows that I never exhausted the functionality of my Sony DSC-S85 (4.1 mp, 3x/6x zoom). I still carry that camera with me. I did not think that the 10D would make me a better photographer or would turn out better pictures. I only knew that I enjoyed taking thousands of pictures with the Sony and that I enjoyed shooting my original Canon EOS Rebel from yesteryear. My decision to upgrade (eg. - drop a load of cash on a want) was based on

1. My desire to shoot with the 10D simply because it feels like a camera to me again. My Sony was a great camera and not that far removed in functionality but I never felt like I used to when I was taking pictures at tennis matches in high school/college or taking photos of friends in the rural setting where I grew up.

2. Perception of my sincere interest in photography. I took pictures of events (family and public) but somehow my family, friends and co-workers just didn't understand the depth of my desire to take photos (and so they treated this lightly or jokingly). Drop $2000+ (with ext warranty & lens) and people tend to take it a little more seriously when you ask if they would like to do a sitting for you.

3. I have a career that has nothing to do with photography. I wanted to express myself in a hobby and I wanted to get a tool that I would be able to use for several years. One friend of mine invests his mad money in hanggliding equipment, another likes to work with Lego's. I wanted this toy.

I like your post about the differences that the 10D has over point and shoot cameras but I honestly didn't know how much work went into using a DSLR until after I had this one. That's OK. I love learning more and more about photography with a DSLR and digital imaging. One benefit I've gotten is that as I got jazzed up about getting this camera and picking this hobby up after many years away from it, I found that I take more pictures because I'm enjoying it and I'm more interested in the critiques I get from users on DPC and PBase and PhotoSIG as well as from my local mentor. With the 1GB CF card I'm getting between 150 and 200 RAW images and after I sift through those and process the 2-5 images that I think best represent what I was trying to capture, this community (and others) truly help me see my work through other eyes and help to sharpen (please forgive the pun) my understanding both as I'm composing the shot and in post-shot processing.

I never thought I'd automatically be a better photographer or that I'd taken all the good shots my Sony would ever take, I just had an opportunity and took it. I'd bet there are others out there that have a similar experience.

Message edited by author 2003-09-04 04:24:36.

09/04/2003 07:33:26 AM · #36

Originally posted by OneSweetSin:

I think you'll find the idea was ripped apart, not you...

tarique

Nikon Coolpix 5700

09/04/2003 07:39:15 AM · #37

Originally posted by xhoss:

Hey newbie - why don't you just quit complaining and have some fun?

He He, I strongly suspect that this is his idea of fun ;)

09/04/2003 07:42:18 AM · #38

Originally posted by Koriyama:

Canon G2 vs Canon D60

Depth of Field:
Difficult to get shallow depth of field with the G2.
Difficult to get deep depth of field with the D60.

Macro:
Easy to get good, detailed macros with G2
Almost impossible to get good, detailed macros with lots of DoF with the D60.

Landscape:
G2: wideangle options, almost infinite depth of field
D60: wide angle options, requires detailed knowledge of hyperfocal techniques to get good Depth of Field

Portrait:
G2: Almost impossible to get good background blur
D60: plenty of lens options, lots of flexibility

Telephoto/Sports:
G2: shutter lag too much to be useful, not enough zoom
D60: plenty of expensive zooms, fast shutter response

Image Size:
G2: big enough for an 11x14 print
D60: big enough for a 20x30 print, storage problems due to size, processing speed problems due to size, CPU speed/ memory size on computer.

Weight
G2: small enough for a jacket pocket
D60: bulky, obvious, intrusive

Controls:
Pretty much identical, D60 some more options for mirror control and button reallocation.

Shutter/aperture control:
G2: full manual through various 'creative' modes
D60: full manual, bulb mode, low noise long exposures, faster shutter lag and higher max shutter speed

AutoFocus:
G2 slow, slow slow
D60 slow slow (slightly better than the G2)

Viewfinder:
G2: about 75% correct due to parallax errors
D60: about 95% due to coverage issues.

Fun Modes:
G2: Sepia, panorama stich mode, vibrant colour mode, black and white mode, movie mode
D60: Nothing.

Post Processing:
G2: Designed for finished images straight from camera, supports RAW for full post processing
D60: Designed for limited in camera finishing and additional sharpening/ tweaking for final image on computer. RAW mode for full post processing

Flash:
G2: Full E-TTL, hot shoe for external control
D60: Full E-TTL, hot shoe for external control

That's about all the ones I can come up with. Generally the more feature rich cameras are much harder to control and to get good pictures with, which is both a plus and a minus point.

Davenit

Canon EOS-1D

09/04/2003 08:46:09 AM · #39

//www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=228674

All above shot with a $400 point and shoot. Gear means squat if you understand light...

Now everyone shut up and go take some pictures... :)

09/04/2003 09:04:49 AM · #40

Originally posted by Davenit:

//www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=228674

All above shot with a $400 point and shoot. Gear means squat if you understand light...

I think that link is probably the best answer I've seen to the 'its unfair' issue.

Everyday Renee

Nikon D80

09/04/2003 10:01:40 AM · #41

I think the biggest difference I have found between my point and shoot Kodak and the more expressive F717 is I can play with the apeture and depth of field!

AhhhaHHH...it's a joy to have some flexibility. Other than that, my little Kodak performed well for the money and gave me some exceptional shots -- though I am enjoying the options of th F717 -- a good photographer could probably do good with both cameras.

The only people who pay a price in these challenges are people who have 1 MP or less cameras. They tend to look blurry...and when presented next to a crisp 10D or F717 photo... the odds aren't in their favor.

Best,
Renee

sonnyh

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

09/04/2003 10:31:42 AM · #42

All above shot with a $400 point and shoot. Gear means squat if you understand light...

text

Nice comment from someone with a 1D/

Ivar

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

09/04/2003 10:36:39 AM · #43

Originally posted by Davenit:

//www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=228674

All above shot with a $400 point and shoot. Gear means squat if you understand light...

Now everyone shut up and go take some pictures... :)

Holy ......

Those pictures are awesome! Thanks for the link!

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

09/04/2003 10:42:42 AM · #44

Originally posted by sonnyh:

All above shot with a $400 point and shoot. Gear means squat if you understand light...

text

Nice comment from someone with a 1D/

Did you look a the link ? They are all wonderful shots, far better than anything I've ever taken, all shot with a Kodak DC4800 digital camera.

Dave's 1D doesn't have anything to do with it whatsoever.

jimmythefish

Canon EOS-10D

09/04/2003 10:47:40 AM · #45

It's a perfect example of choosing a camera that's right for you. Landscape shots are easier technically to deal with if you have a camera which tends towards the large depth of field...it frees your mental measurabating hand up and uses it to think about photography, which he is clearly excellent at.

'The camera doesn't matter' argument gets old, though, as it does matter if you're trying to do something that your camera can't. Anyways...

PaulMdx

Canon EOS-1D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM

09/04/2003 10:48:10 AM · #46

As someone who has a ~$400 camera (actually Â£280), I certainly have no complaint with someone saying it's not the equipment that makes my photos poor.

However, I suspect a number of people who DO have a reasonable excuse spent a LOT less than $400.

As an example, see my second camera, which cost $150. Also notice the huge difference in scores between cameras.

09/04/2003 10:51:31 AM · #47

Originally posted by jimmythefish:

'The camera doesn't matter' argument gets old, though, as it does matter if you're trying to do something that your camera can't. Anyways...

Mine will not take pictures in the dark, or with the lens cap on, or underwater, or without the battery charged, or infra-red, or multiple exposures, or without needing to focus. Is that unfair ?

Several cameras can do all of the things above, plus plenty of other things that my very expensive camera can't do. Is that unfair ?

Of course it isn't. It just means I have to learn to work with the limitations of the particular tool I choose to use. As jimmy mentions, point and shoot cameras have huge advantages over SLRs for landscapes if you want huge depth of field - it isn't unfair, its just a limitation you have to learn to work with if you use an SLR for landscape.

Message edited by author 2003-09-04 10:52:54.