Are you a digital photography nut?

[kbasa]

Or are you intersted in digital photography from a real person's perspective?

I've been having some fun at Digital Grin (http://www.dgrin.com)

It's a forum a lot like this one that's run by the same guy that invented smugmug, Chris MacCaskill. He rides BMWs too.

:thumb

[ian408]

thanks bast, I mean kbasa :):

ian

[harryt11]

Just a quick plug for Smugmug. Yesterday my computer decided to lay down on me in a big way. Wouldn't start back up and couldn't get anything to work.

I had to start over with the recovery CD and by the time it was over I had nothing left on my hard drive. I realize I might have been able to have an expert come in and do a recovery, I need the internet in my business and couldn't afford the downtime.

Since I started taking digital photos last summer I have uploaded to Smugmug, so I didn't lose any. Also makes it very easy to put photos on forums.

If you don't use Smugmug you should.

[ian408]

Originally posted by bronson

If you don't use Smugmug you should.

In addition, if you mention bronson by his e-mail address
when you sign up, not only will you pay less but he will
get a discount next time.

I second the vote for smugmug.

ian

[lorazepam]

smugmug rocks!!!!
http://lorazepam.smugmug.com/Motorcycles

[427Cobra]

I like photography (analog and digital) and work for Fuji Film in Greenwood SC.

Mike

[lorazepam]

I am on my second Fuji digital camera, and I love it! for my film cameras I think they get the best colors way better than Kodak.

[kbasa]

Originally posted by lorazepam
I am on my second Fuji digital camera, and I love it! for my film cameras I think they get the best colors way better than Kodak.

I've always thought Fuji film did a nice job with greens and blues. I liked Agfa too, with their ability to render pinks and other soft colors pretty nicely.

[427Cobra]

Thanks to us (Fuji) 35mm film is cheaper today than 15 years ago. Film is one of those things "If It Ain't Broke, Don't Fix It". The first Fuji film I ever bought was before I went to Japan in 1989. Out parrents trusted Kodak so we did too. I was mainly shooting B&W back then. (Excuse)

I have heard good things about Agfa but have shot very few rolls.

Digital cameras are hurting the 35mm business right now.

http://www.fujimed.com/images/sc_plant.jpg

There's the site. 8 Factories and the Distrubution Center. We're larger than BMW in Greenville SC. 2,000,000 sf

As much as I love BMW cars and bikes I couldn't leave the Japanese for the Germans.

Mike
Fuji Emp. #11

[fish]

What's "film"? :p

[knary]

Originally posted by fish
What's "film"? :p

:lol

I almost asked just that question.

[fish]

Originally posted by knary
:lol

I almost asked just that question.


You can ask "what's photo paper?" instead. Remember the stuff that came in big boxes wrapped in thick black plastic cuz it was light sensitive? Seems so barbaric now, doesn't it? Ha...the darkroom ages.

Now is probably not a good time to work for a film company. Hell, Kodak just announced they were going to stop making film cameras.

[dlearl476]

Originally posted by KBasa
I've always thought Fuji film did a nice job with greens and blues. I liked Agfa too, with their ability to render pinks and other soft colors pretty nicely.

Not to mention, Fuji and Agfa both sponsor real racing cars.

[427Cobra]

Yep, I'm afraid it will be like "records" one day. What's a Record? See it already sounds weird.

NASCAR... Left, quick turn Left, turn Left, whhhooooo quick turn left. That was fun when you (we) were 8 years old on a Go-Cart.

Mike

[basketcase]

I'm not a shutter bug, but one of my kids is. Elective coursework in photo composition, studio photography, and darkroom methods has been on the schedule in the past. They did learn to develop their own black and white as part of the process.

That said, there are several digital cameras in the house, and all the casual, "snapshot" pictures are done with digital.

Changing tacts on the same subject, I have a brother in law who does sports and wedding photography as a sideline to his dayjob. He got into it through the backdoor about 10 years ago when doing group shots of his son's baseball team. The league picked up on it, and it gradually became a steady weekend thing.

He has just put quite a bit into high quality digital equipment for weddings, and when he does a shoot, the client can view the proofs on a computer monitor, pick the ones they want, and make their order.

Will film ever become a "thing of the past" that we view in museums? Probably not. But considering the popularity of digital with the public, and the way cost of the technology has become reasonable, I do think film is well on its way to permenantly occupying the back seat.

Just MHO.

[The_Veg]

I've never been more than a 'casual amateur' photographer but I've been fully digital for three years. My plan was not to make the leap so soon or thoroughly, but in '98 my film camera took a swim in the Brazos River. Took no pictures for three years due to being too broke to buy another camera.
In early 2001 I got a digital, thinking at first that it would supplement the film camera I kept meaning to get but never did. The digital was much easier to take to and get used to than I expected though, which is good because I wound up spending much more on it than I'd planned to.
Oddly enough I'm anticipating returning soon to the film world but in a low-tech direction. I've been accumulating a small handful of antique 35mm cameras almost by accident, the latest being a pre-war Argus C2 I also have a couple of old Olympii). It's in great shape and seems to work but I have yet to test it with film loaded. I rather like the idea of extrememly low-tech photography and I can't wait to see what I can do with it.

[BradfordBenn]

Well it is time to look for a new digital camera as the Elph is just not fast enough anymore. The main complaint is it take so long between pictures - even with the review off.

So what are the suggestions?

My main criteria are:

1600x1200 at 24bit minimum "best setting"
quick shooting (no five second lag between picture
Would like SD or CF ram.
Size matters, small... is good in this case.


Suggestions?

[lorazepam]

Brad, what about price? I imagine you can get a lot more camera for what you paid for the elph. Try these guys, I have delt with them and have gotten good service. I have bought from them twice and no complaints.

http://www.beachcamera.com/shop/home.asp\

They have a minolta 2mp for under 200.00 it fits in your pocket. DiImage cameras are small.
I personally can't complain about my fuji.

[knary]

What he asked:

1. what price
2. what size
3. how many features?

You'll probably find that the newer versions of your Canon have what you are looking for. But if you want more features, the Canon S-series might be what you want. I have a Canon S45 and have been generally very happy with it.

[ian408]

Originally posted by BradfordBenn
Well it is time to look for a new digital camera as the Elph is just not fast enough anymore. The main complaint is it take so long between pictures - even with the review off.


Suggestions?

I recently went on a ride where everyone whipped out
S50's. Myself included.

The other popular camera seems to be the S400.

The S400 is smaller. It's 4MP where the S50 is 5MP.
The real difference is the 50 has a richer set of manual
features. It also has a cover for the lens that acts as
the switch for turning the camera on. Both cameras
can be operated one handed.

Either way, these two cameras were on my "short list"
before I bought the S50.

I should add, a visit to www.dpreview.com will answer a
lot of questions.

Ian

[BradfordBenn]

Originally posted by knary
What he asked:

1. what price
2. what size
3. how many features?

You'll probably find that the newer versions of your Canon have what you are looking for. But if you want more features, the Canon S-series might be what you want. I have a Canon S45 and have been generally very happy with it.

I would like the price to be under $500
Small enough to put into a pocket easily
Features:

timer
mpeg movie
flash control similiar to the Canon Elph

[username]

i wanted a small camera that i could tuck into my pocket and i didnt look like i was happy to see people. i also wanted to take good photos. so ive got a fuji finepix f601zoom, and i dig it big time. it's small, has good battery life, and is durable. it's old school - it takes smart media cards which are limited to 128MB but thats ok, theyre cheap on ebay.

i'd check em out. the price was good, i paid 315 for the camera, a 32mb card, all cables, and a little cradle to make it easy to plug this thing into any television set. oh, and it comes with it's own rechargeable battery, which i like. it also has a different form factor, which feels better in my hand.

fuji f601z overview (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Fujifilm/fuji_finepixf601z.asp)

and i highly recommend using this site to downselect. they make it easy to sort on features, and they have awesome reviews.

digital photography review (http://www.dpreview.com)

[BMWRider]

Originally posted by fish
Now is probably not a good time to work for a film company. Hell, Kodak just announced they were going to stop making film cameras.

I hadn't heard that yet.
Wow. Who'da thunk it? :eek
Pretty sad, really, even though I confess I'll never use film again ...

[DesertRider]

Originally posted by RickM Will film ever become a "thing of the past" that we view in museums? Probably not. But considering the popularity of digital with the public, and the way cost of the technology has become reasonable, I do think film is well on its way to permenantly occupying the back seat.


Film is toast -- say goodbye. Save some for the museums.

I used to be a professional photographer, still do some commercial work. Over the years I probably went through a boxcar-load of little yellow film boxes, everything from 35mm to 4x5. 10 years ago I, like virtually every other pro photographer, would have told you that digital is too crude, the resolution is too low, and the pictures are too noisy to ever think about digital replacing film for anything but consumer snapshots.

My, how times change.

Four years ago I sold all my Pentax medium-format gear. Two years ago I sold off the last of my 35mm gear, including the Nikon F4s that had been the most trusty mechanical friends I'd ever had. I still have my Linhof 4x5 camera and will probably never sell it, but that's not so much out of practicality as because I enjoy the process of view-camera shooting. That, and the fact that large format is the only place where film still has an advantage, so I may still have use for the Linhof to do some things that the digital cameras will not do.

But other than that, film is dead -- as dead as buggy-whips after the Model T came out. Today you can get a 6-megapixel SLR for under $1000 that will produce a better image than an equivalent 35mm SLR shooting typical color films, and if you do much shooting the digital will overall be cheaper than an equivalent $300 film SLR. (If you shoot and develop 50 rolls of film you will have more than paid the difference between the $300 film camera and the $1000 digital. And of course there are $400 4- and 5-megapixel cameras that will approach and at times exceed the image quality of the 35mm as well.)

I know there are people who say that digital still hasn't caught up because most pro digital cameras are 6 megapixels, and a 35mm film frame is the equivalent of a 30-megapixel sensor. People who say that reveal their complete ignorance of how this stuff works. Don't believe it.

A good 3.3-megapixel digital camera, with the image properly processed, yields an image that matches the quality and *effective* resolution of a typical 35mm image. A good 6-megapixel image surpasses the quality of most 35mm images, being matched or bettered only if you use ultra-fine, ultra-slow film (e.g., Fuji Velvia) and even then only if the technique is excellent (superb optics, perfect focus, etc.). Higher resolution digital images have no equal in the 35mm world, and some (e.g., 16 megapixel sensors) beat medium format film. Only large format remains out of reach, and the market and applications for that kind of format are tiny slices of the overall market.

It's a bit sad that film has reached its end just at the time when we have available the finest films ever made, stuff we would have killed for 20 years ago. But that's exactly as it would be predicted by Milan's Law, penned by (ahem)... me: "A given technology reaches its peak at the moment it becomes obsolete." Seems counter-intuitive, but that's always the way it is. The last turntables made were true wonders, the best ever. Likewise with records, 8-tracks, radial engines, Commodore computers (remember the Amiga?), everything.

I still have in my fridge dozens of rolls of film, some still in the original pro-packs. They're nice mementos, and who knows, someday they may be worth something. :)

[DarrylRi]

Originally posted by DesertRider
Film is toast -- say goodbye. Save some for the museums.
<snip>
But that's exactly as it would be predicted by Milan's Law, penned by (ahem)... me: "A given technology reaches its peak at the moment it becomes obsolete." Seems counter-intuitive, but that's always the way it is. The last turntables made were true wonders, the best ever. Likewise with records, 8-tracks, radial engines, Commodore computers (remember the Amiga?), everything. I agree completely with your thesis, but...

Did 8 tracks really ever reach a "pinnacle"? Wasn't it more like, not so deep a hole? ;-)

[BradfordBenn]

Thanks you guys for all your help.

I knew it was going to be a step up in quality, but HOLY CATS! It is really difficult to take a good picture of Chloe, our Newfoundland. She is lots of black colors and most cameras just wash her into a big black blob. I took a shot just trying the camera's point and shoot speed.

Here is her picture at 12.5% of original size...
http://www.bradfordbenn.com/photolinks/ChloeHiRez12.jpg

And a few more, the numbers at the end is percent of original. (make sure you go to full screen mode on your browser as some will scale for you...)

http://www.bradfordbenn.com/photolinks/ChloeHiRez12.jpg
http://www.bradfordbenn.com/photolinks/ChloeHiRez25.jpg
http://www.bradfordbenn.com/photolinks/ChloeHiRez50.jpg
http://www.bradfordbenn.com/photolinks/ChloeHiRez100.jpg

[BMWBeauty]

Brad , She is definitely one gorgeous dog. Nice pics....:)

[BradfordBenn]

Thank you:dog

[username]

looks like youve got her plugged into something? :uhoh

[BradfordBenn]

Jennifer was playing video games before Chloe decided that she needed all the attention. Just the cable for the controller.

[RebeccaV]

I used Dpreview.com to help me decide on my Nikon 4MP 4300 (small, light, fixed lens). My only complaint is that if I am moving or if my subject is (like dogs and motorcycles are apt to do...) the image is blurry.

Dpreview doesn't address this. Or does it? Why does it do this and how is the S50 with this?

Cloe is gorgeous, BB. Here's my Stella and I on a walk last November:

[BMWBeauty]

Stella is a gorgeous dog.... Looks like she is having fun ....
Got to love those big dogs.....:)

[lorazepam]

It may have to do with the "speed" of the camera. If your camera is not able to process enough light, it is like shooting slow film in a non digital camera. Fast moving images or an unsteady camera will show up with slow shutter speeds which allow for more light to reach the film or sensor. Try lowering the quality of your images and see if the camera will speed up. If you are going to store your pics digitally, you don't need the highest resolution the camera offers.

[BradfordBenn]

Originally posted by boxergrrlie
I used Dpreview.com to help me decide on my Nikon 4MP 4300 (small, light, fixed lens). My only complaint is that if I am moving or if my subject is (like dogs and motorcycles are apt to do...) the image is blurry.

Dpreview doesn't address this. Or does it? Why does it do this and how is the S50 with this?

Cloe is gorgeous, BB. Here's my Stella and I on a walk last November:

Nothing lilke a dog having fun.

I looked at Dpreview and it gave lots of information that made my head hurt. So I read the posts and then did some digging in consumer's report. Ultimately the reason came down to I like the Canon Elph I have, it just takes too long between pictures which the S50 took care of. The other thing was having the ability to set what you are photographing pretty well with the little icons on the wheel.

As soon as I get some action photos, I'll share 'em.

[lorazepam]

Glad ya found a camera Brad. I look forward to shots from the bike soon.

[RebeccaV]

Originally posted by lorazepam
It may have to do with the "speed" of the camera. If your camera is not able to process enough light, it is like shooting slow film in a non digital camera. Fast moving images or an unsteady camera will show up with slow shutter speeds which allow for more light to reach the film or sensor. Try lowering the quality of your images and see if the camera will speed up. If you are going to store your pics digitally, you don't need the highest resolution the camera offers.

Yeah, I have it at the lowest resolution and I have it set at the highest iso. I think that the problem is lack of control over the shutter speed. Maybe a new camera is in order, 'cause Stella doesn't like to sit still! :D

[DesertRider]

Originally posted by boxergrrlie
I used Dpreview.com to help me decide on my Nikon 4MP 4300 (small, light, fixed lens). My only complaint is that if I am moving or if my subject is (like dogs and motorcycles are apt to do...) the image is blurry.

Most digicams have multiple modes -- Aperture priority, Shutter priority (sometimes labeled "T" for Time Priority), Programmed mode, etc. If yours does, try setting it to Shutter priority and select a faster shutter speed, that should help with blur of moving objects. But if *you're* the one that's moving, almost nothing will help. If you move the camera while shooting, the photo will be blurry. Pro photographers know that, and that's why they carry around big, heavy tripods. :D

[ian408]

Originally posted by boxergrrlie
I used Dpreview.com to help me decide on my Nikon 4MP 4300 (small, light, fixed lens). My only complaint is that if I am moving or if my subject is (like dogs and motorcycles are apt to do...) the image is blurry.

Dpreview doesn't address this. Or does it? Why does it do this and how is the S50 with this?

Cloe is gorgeous, BB. Here's my Stella and I on a walk last November:

Happy doggie!

You can adjust the "film speed" or ISO, shutter speed and
Apeture with the S50. Depending on the effect, like say
some motion blur on the bike, you'd set the shutter speed
to something like 1/60th and let the camera determine apeture
setting. You could set the ISO to 200 and choose auto to
take a picture of moving doggie and probably be good to go.

With the S50, you have choice like shutter or apeture priority
mode or full auto or full manual. You can also shoot in RAW
as well. RAW is only important if you wnat to futz with PhotoShop.

Good luck!

Ian

[DarrylRi]

A lot of cameras have a 'S'ports mode that speeds up the shutter speed, and also will auto lock the focus so there is less time between shots. This may be what you need if your camera has it.

[oldcarkook]

Dog pics? Here's my dog doing what he does best!
http://www.oldgmctrucks.com/photos/bikes/dogzlife.jpg

I have two Sony Mavica cameras; one older floppy disc one and a newer 4 megapixel CD type one that I love. I have all but discarded my Nikon 35MM as digital has taken over my life.

[R80RTJohnny]

Digital cameras have become a way of life. Point and shoot. See the picture. Delete if need be. It's only memory right?

Jean

PS: KBasa - Cool site! Included it in my favorites.

[CanadaDan]

Gave up film years ago. Have stuck to long optics though, the Sony F505 and now an Oly C2100 UZ. I have a few of my favorite shots on my personal site.

http://members.shaw.ca/canadadan/images/olympus_c2100uz.jpg

[TheSlashFiveTourer]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by KBasa
Or are you intersted in digital photography.....?

Found an interesting website advertisement in the November '04 issue of SHUTTERBUG magazine (p.104) called "IN ANY CASE .com." They carry/sell all those little protective plastic cases we digitographers need for our Memory Stick/SmartMedia/MMC/Secure Digital memory cards and AA batteries. Looks like some neat stuff. And you can order online.

Check 'em out (http://www.inanycase.com) ! :thumb

[splinelube]

Heretic!

[TheSlashFiveTourer]

Originally posted by RJF-90/S,100RS
Heretic!
"heretic" [:confused:] - (def.) - "the holder of an unorthodox opinion...a person believing in or practising heresy". {:evil}

Hmmm....somebody must be an old-school 35mm film freak. Or, anti-plastic! :brow

[splinelube]

and 120 mm twin lens reflex you betchum

[TheSlashFiveTourer]

Originally posted by RJF-90/S,100RS
and 120 mm twin lens reflex you betchum

AHHHAAAA!! - I knew it! [;)] I could just tell by the tilt of your jib that you were an old film freak.

Twin lens reflex you say...I have TWO of 'em equipped with medium and telephoto lenses and THIS little beauty....is a CAMERA !! :thumb

[splinelube]

Nice how well they travel on a "real"motorcycle isn't it.

[dancogan]

Oh, now you guys are making me miss my old Rolleiflex 2.8E, with the Zeiss optics. Let's see, if I sold the bike I might have enough to pick one up ... Naaaah! Maybe if I sold that seldom used Leica rangefinder stuff ...

[splinelube]

If you sell all your Leica gear and just half of your bike you will have enough to buy either my 2.8 or 3.5 Rollei. Am I or am I not a friend?

[merrittgene]

Oh man, I sure do lust after a nice medium format camera. They're works of art and engineering.

But, alas, they are kinda like comparing a solid brass sextant to a GPS. The newer version is arguably *not* as good, but it also takes two minutes to produce exceptional results.

[dancogan]

Thanks for posting that pic of the Rollei 2.8E. The one on E-Bay seems awfully low priced for anything in decent working order. Oh well, 35 mm is so flexible, whether it's digital or film, I think I'll stick with one format.

[TheSlashFiveTourer]

Originally posted by merrittgene
Oh man, I sure do lust after a nice medium format camera. They're works of art and engineering.

But, alas, they are kinda like comparing a solid brass sextant to a GPS. The newer version is arguably *not* as good, but it also takes two minutes to produce exceptional results.
A solid brass sextant with a good set of tables will NEVER let you down - if you know what you're doing. GPS, on the other hand, is dependent upon the benevolence of Uncle Samuel. One flick of the switch in some military space complex somewhere and your GPS becomes a useless little plastic box taking up room in your tankbag.

Our Nav Instructors pounded our heads with "Compass and Map...Compass and Map...learn 'em and use 'em." Most of their other instructions were lost on me many years ago - which is why I'm now buying a GPS! :clap ..... :clap ..... :clap

[TheSlashFiveTourer]

Originally posted by dancogan
Thanks for posting that pic of the Rollei 2.8E. The one on E-Bay seems awfully low priced for anything in decent working order. Oh well, 35 mm is so flexible, whether it's digital or film, I think I'll stick with one format.
The photos of that Rollei 2.8E were so sharp in detail over at e-Bay that I've asked the seller what camera he (or she...) used to take the pictures. Pretty good bet that he (or she...) wasn't using 120 film. :brow

That little Yashica 635 I posted up above is a combination camera in that it uses BOTH 120 and 35mm film. You can see the accessory spool, pressure plate and adapter off to the left of the camera. I bought my 635 specifically for my BMW trips in the mid-70's just after I purchased my R75/5. It was neat having both 120 and 35mm film available in the one camera. It was a conversation piece at my early rallies. I've never seen one like it in my travels. It still works just fine and looks as good now as it did the day I liberated it from a camera store in the province of Quebec.

The 2.8E at e-Bay, on closer examination, has a few bangs and scratches which might affect its performance - but it's sure a pretty piece of machinery, eh??:wave