What's your weapon?

[Lisarocket]

Fuji S9600 main

Fuji S5600 (spare now)

Lumix DMC TZ3 compact

Yes, I'm still wearing slippers as i can't afford anything better...

 

[SpookyFrank]

Canon EOS 300 35mm. I'm way to poor for a digital SLR

 

[johey24]

Top Digital Cameras
For an interesting comparison to this poll:

Quote from the site: "These lists represent the top camera makes and models used to create photos uploaded to Flickr, the best online photo sharing application in the world. The lists are generated automatically by periodically sampling the EXIF data from the stream of recent uploads. The listing is ranked by the number of photos uploaded to Flickr by each camera model. Model names come directly from the EXIF data. The list is updated every Monday."

http://bighugelabs.com/flickr/topcameras.php

Comments?

 

[mauvais]

I'd like to see some stats to show how many of those pictures were absolute shit.

 

[johey24]

I'd like to see some stats to show how many of those pictures were absolute shit.

Guess 99.9%, as with my shots ... and as with most of the others I have seen anywhere else on the Net.

 

[mauvais]

 

[johey24]

Why frown?

 

[mauvais]

Cos almost everything's shit!

 

[johey24]

Cos almost everything's shit!

Mmmm. But not EVERYthing. And those are the gems making this all worthwhile.

 

[Paul Russell]

http://bighugelabs.com/flickr/topcameras.php

Comments?

I'm surprised that the PENTAX K100D is down in the 50s/60s considering it's an SLR that's had a load a good reviews.

I guess people just head for Canon or Nikon.

 

[johey24]

I mean, if you go out and take 500 digital photos on a day ... how many are you proud enough to post out here? 5 or 10? That is 1-2% ... might make for an interesting, separate poll - and for the sake of honesty, a poll that might need to be anonymous when it comes to voting.

Maybe I am simply a shit photographer, and you guys are great, but if I go out and take shots, I'd be proud enough to post less than 2% of what I download on my comp at night. In the last 2 years I have taken + 35 000 photos, I think my flickr now holds about 650. Quickly calculated, that's less than 2%.

Another interesting poll would be how many of us post on here without using PShop or some form of "help" and what % of "originals" we'd be proud enough to post on here without this aid?

But let's not high jack this thread. Anybody with the technical know-how wanna launch a poll about % taken and % posted etc etc?

 

[mauvais]

I photoshop everything and post maybe 5-15% - the others are usually not 'bad' per se, but very similar to other better ones, and noone wants 100 pictures of the same forest.

 

[johey24]

I photoshop everything and post maybe 5-15%

interesting - this is what i think we can all learn from.

[/QUOTE] and noone wants 100 pictures of the same forest.[/QUOTE]
true ... nor 20 of the same passing chinese faces taken with a 300mm zoom

I do not have / own PS, I use picassa's limited crop and sharpen effects on most I feel confident enough to post.

another interesting poll might be how many of us use tripods (i do not). This may also teach us a lot when comparing / looking at individuals' photos.

 

[johey24]

I'm surprised that the PENTAX K100D is down in the 50s/60s considering it's an SLR that's had a load a good reviews.

I guess people just head for Canon or Nikon.

Paul
Been thinking of getting a 2nd cam, and interested in the fact that Nikon D70 is so popular on U75. Do you use any post-production tools? Your photos are exceptionally clear and sharp (something I find a problem with mine - not sure if I was sold a fake Chinese version of Canon .... ???) or is it because you use a tripod etc?

 

[mauvais]

I have a tripod that cost maybe £250, but I rarely use it as I go everywhere by bike and it's inconvenient. I haven't taken any pictures at all recently either. If you plan ahead and take it then it definitely gets you better pictures - partly some you could only take with a tripod, and partly some you thought through better.

They last forever and they're invaluable for many things, so despite not using it recently, it was a good investment.

As for the D70, I won't answer for Paul but I've got one and once you've learnt how to use it or indeed any SLR, it's great. Start a new thread and we can have a look at your pics & answer more of this stuff!

 

[Hocus Eye.]

Antidote to this thread.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm

 

[johey24]

Antidote to this thread.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm

And there you go and break all our amateur hearts.

Yes, sad, but ultimately true.

 

[stowpirate]

Antidote to this thread.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm

Interesting I liked the following:

"The more expensive cameras and lenses don't do much of anything significant for the huge increases in price."

Bit like everything in life

 

[mauvais]

It's bloody well not true. I could walk to work instead of using an expensive, new fangled bike/car/train, and I'd achieve the same outcome of getting there in the end - but it's 10 miles and I'd be fired long before I turned up.

 

[Paul Russell]

Paul
Been thinking of getting a 2nd cam, and interested in the fact that Nikon D70 is so popular on U75. Do you use any post-production tools? Your photos are exceptionally clear and sharp (something I find a problem with mine - not sure if I was sold a fake Chinese version of Canon .... ???) or is it because you use a tripod etc?

A tripod? No!

Just a fast enough shutter speed and embarrassingly little post-production.

The D70 is a good camera but I guess there are real advances that have been made in the >3 years since it came out (low light performance, dynamic range?, as well as the obvious pixel count)

 

[stowpirate]

It's bloody well not true. I could walk to work instead of using an expensive, new fangled bike/car/train, and I'd achieve the same outcome of getting there in the end - but it's 10 miles and I'd be fired long before I turned up.

Walking is free so it does not count

 

[Paul Russell]

Interesting I liked the following:

"The more expensive cameras and lenses don't do much of anything significant for the huge increases in price."

Bit like everything in life

Then how comes that Ken Rockwell buys all these new cameras the day they come out then? Or is it one rule for the Rockmeister, etc.

I do generally take his point though.

A lot of people who "must have" the latest megapixel increase never print big enough for it to notice.

 

[johey24]

Even Ansel said "The single most important component
of a camera is the twelve inches behind it."

braggart

 

[cybertect]

Antidote to this thread.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm

Ansel didn't even have Photoshop!

but he was a very skilled operator in the darkroom. Since astronomers were mentioned...

I'm not kidding. A bunch of these turkeys used university astronomers to predict the one time in almost two decades that the conditions would match and had 300 of the clueless converge at just the right spot. They still didn't get the clouds, snow or shadows right. This makes Ansel or any other creative artist cringe. Of course they didn't get anything like what they wanted. Art is a lot more.

http://www.studio-international.co.uk/photo/adams.asp

His most famous and widely reproduced image is ‘Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico.’ Its familiar, final appearance is very different from the contact print and illustrates, very well, the care and precision of Adams’ darkroom work. A layer of thin, white clouds at the top of the picture has been eliminated; the moon is burned-in to emphasize the contrast with the lower cloud layers; the profile of the distant mountains is given extra exposure to provide clearer delineation; and the foreground trees have been also treated to a longer exposure to create density and texture.

 

[cybertect]

A lot of people who "must have" the latest megapixel increase never print big enough for it to notice.

Probably most of the time that I've had my 5D, I've barely exploited its 12.8 megapixels. However, the times that I have needed them, such as when I shot a feature for French magazine, I'm very glad they were there.

TBH, I bought it for the full-frame sensor and viewfinder, though. The 6 Mpx on my previous 300D were plenty for most of my purposes. Anything above eight or ten was largely a bonus.

 

[Paul Russell]

Probably most of the time that I've had my 5D, I've barely exploited its 12.8 megapixels. However, the times that I have needed them, such as when I shot a feature for French magazine, I'm very glad they were there.

TBH, I bought it for the full-frame sensor and viewfinder, though. The 6 Mpx on my previous 300D were plenty for most of my purposes. Anything above eight or ten was largely a bonus.

Yes, I wasn't including most people here in the "most people" if you see what I mean. Just that the majority of digital SLR users are not going to print more than A3 or supply stuff to agencies/mags.

I'd love a few more pixels personally cos I often get stuff printed big.

I've seen big exhibition prints done with the 5D and the quality was just amazing.

 

[Herbsman.]

Canon EOS 1DS Mk III

 

[mauvais]

You lie!

 

[Herbsman.]

I lie

 

[weltweit]

I have never had the need to print bigger than 10x15 so far.

My camera can output 6mp or 12mp, so far I always use 6mp.