Page 105 of 140 FirstFirst ... 55595101102103104105106107108109115 ... LastLast
Results 1,561 to 1,575 of 2091
  1. #1561
    Fluff n Stuff's Avatar
    Fluff n Stuff is offline ♫♪♫♪♪♫♪♫♫♪♫♪♪♫♪♫♪♪
    Joined
    May 2001
    Location
    South Seattle, Wa
    Posts
    12,389

    Re: To our resident camera buffs...

    Ah, the 'Diamond Ring'. Gorgeous... but if you ever shoot an eclipse, use a camera that has an ELECTRONIC view finder... the brightest it can show is just white. If you look through an OPTICAL viewfinder, it will be the last image you enjoy.

    Easy get around when shooting the Sun with an OVF camera? Use a tripod, and hold a piece of paper behind the camera to adjust the composition and focus... the image will be projected onto the paper, and not your retina.

    Hopefully the paper doesn't catch fire. Did for me, once... just a little... spooked everybody around me 'nStuff!



  2. #1562
    Joined
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    74,682

    Re: To our resident camera buffs...

    Quote Originally Posted by Fluff n Stuff View Post
    Ah, the 'Diamond Ring'. Gorgeous... but if you ever shoot an eclipse, use a camera that has an ELECTRONIC view finder... the brightest it can show is just white. If you look through an OPTICAL viewfinder, it will be the last image you enjoy.

    Easy get around when shooting the Sun with an OVF camera? Use a tripod, and hold a piece of paper behind the camera to adjust the composition and focus... the image will be projected onto the paper, and not your retina.

    Hopefully the paper doesn't catch fire. Did for me, once... just a little... spooked everybody around me 'nStuff!
    Good advice. I never would have considered a workaround and may
    have done to my eyes what we used to do to bugs with a magnifying glass.

  3. #1563
    Joined
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Southern Ontario
    Age
    45
    Posts
    13,194

    Re: To our resident camera buffs...

    Yeah I've used the same technique with my telescope to see the sun flares. Only other thing to watch was that the telescope its self didn't heat up too much. As you noticed, you can catch a lot of heat.

  4. #1564
    Joined
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Home
    Posts
    6,888

    Re: To our resident camera buffs...

    Well, back from another trip to Puerto Rico. There's a neat hotel on the beach, just off the airport, called the El San Juan. On top of the hotel they've got a barbecue joint called Brother Jimmy's. The night shots are all from this roof, with exposures from 1 to 4 seconds using the handrailing as a camera rest. Kinda wish I had my tripod with me, but no such luck. As for the others, it's sunrise over the crap-plant in Caguas, a kingfisher-looking bird shot from about 50' off with my 70-300mm lens, another lizard, and the view from my fifth floor window at the Hampton Inn. LOL. They actually had cockfighting on TV one night.




    In other news, my one man campaign at economic stimulus (and blowing spare cash) continues with the purchase of the Canon 580EXII flash unit and Sigma's 10-20mm wide angle zoom. The Sigma seems to have pretty good reviews, and is only about 60% the cost of Canon's 10-22. I've really missed a wider lens on some trips.

  5. #1565
    Fluff n Stuff's Avatar
    Fluff n Stuff is offline ♫♪♫♪♪♫♪♫♫♪♫♪♪♫♪♫♪♪
    Joined
    May 2001
    Location
    South Seattle, Wa
    Posts
    12,389

    Re: To our resident camera buffs...

    I like s14, the night shot of the Bay... the city light glow over the buildings is a favorite effect of mine!



  6. #1566
    Joined
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Home
    Posts
    6,888

    Re: To our resident camera buffs...

    ^^That's looking west towards Old San Juan, where all the cruise ships dock, hence the light. FWIW, that white dot near the top of s16 is Venus and was my gauge of how still I could hold the camera for a couple of seconds.

  7. #1567
    Joined
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Home
    Posts
    6,888

    Re: To our resident camera buffs...

    I spent Monday and Tuesday in Fort Frances, Ontario. Tuesday morning before dawn I drove highway 11 across Rainy Lake and stopped by a view point to take the following shots. The first are about an hour before sunrise while the last are still about 1/2 hour before sunrise. All are with the new Sigma 10-20mm lens. It's not a particularly fast lens, but with this aperture is just doesn't take much light to take hand-held photos.


  8. #1568
    Fluff n Stuff's Avatar
    Fluff n Stuff is offline ♫♪♫♪♪♫♪♫♫♪♫♪♪♫♪♫♪♪
    Joined
    May 2001
    Location
    South Seattle, Wa
    Posts
    12,389

    Re: To our resident camera buffs...

    I'm not so good with a handheld... here's mars:




  9. #1569
    Joined
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Southern Ontario
    Age
    45
    Posts
    13,194

    Re: To our resident camera buffs...

    ^^^ was it a little chilly out 'n had the shakes?

  10. #1570
    Joined
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Southern Ontario
    Age
    45
    Posts
    13,194

    Re: To our resident camera buffs...

    Quote Originally Posted by myv65 View Post
    I spent Monday and Tuesday in Fort Frances, Ontario. Tuesday morning before dawn I drove highway 11 across Rainy Lake and stopped by a view point to take the following shots. The first are about an hour before sunrise while the last are still about 1/2 hour before sunrise. All are with the new Sigma 10-20mm lens. It's not a particularly fast lens, but with this aperture is just doesn't take much light to take hand-held photos.

    Wow you were way out there. You know if you wanted Toronto, you'd need to go the other way.

    I've never been farther west the Wawa (while in Canada) my self. So I'm not too familiar with that area. Was that the bridge to the States?

  11. #1571
    Fluff n Stuff's Avatar
    Fluff n Stuff is offline ♫♪♫♪♪♫♪♫♫♪♫♪♪♫♪♫♪♪
    Joined
    May 2001
    Location
    South Seattle, Wa
    Posts
    12,389

    Re: To our resident camera buffs...

    As a matter of fact, no... just a 20 second exposure 'nStuff. :shrug:



  12. #1572
    Joined
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Home
    Posts
    6,888

    Re: To our resident camera buffs...

    LOL @ fluff. Looks like some sort of modern art 'n stuff. The longest I took Tuesday was four seconds, and that was leaning against the van.

    @SP, no, the bridge to the states is actually between a pair of paper mills and not particularly scenic. That would be about four miles behind pictures 3 and 4, more or less.

  13. #1573
    Joined
    Dec 2001
    Age
    71
    Posts
    64,554

    Re: To our resident camera buffs...

    Ok all you camera buffs, I'm on the prowl. And I'm a bit turned OFF towards towards Canon at the moment. That is unless I can be convinced that Canon is as good of a choice relative to Nikon's L100 or P90, which are the two I'm looking at most closely at the moment. Pros and cons, recommendations, please?? Would like to set a max limit of 500 bucks.

    I can't justify going digital SLR right now. I'm more of a casual shooter and will be doing some traveling from time to time, now that my physical mobility is so much better. Also like to take very close-up shots, so good macro performance is important.

    So, there ya have it guys. Let me have it

  14. #1574
    Joined
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Southern Ontario
    Age
    45
    Posts
    13,194

    Re: To our resident camera buffs...

    Full DSLR is not for everyone. It is good to recognize that before you go shopping.

    Lets face it, if its going to be too big and clumsy for you, you're not going to take it with you.

    I'm not overly familiar with Nikon's product line and I haven't been keeping up with all the new Canon cameras either. But I downloaded Nikon's brochure and had a quick look.

    The first thing that caught my eye was their VR Image Stabilization. Its NOT Image Stabilization!!! Its Virtual. They try to compensate for vibration by forcing your camera to take quicker shots. Less time the lens is open, the less the affect of vibration. But now you have less light to deal with, so the camera has to amplify what it saw more. This means you'll be amplifying the noise more too. This will equate to a 'noisy' image (an image with specs, dots, and blotches). Now the camera should be able to compensate for this, but I don't know how well.

    On the other hand, Canon uses an optical Image Stabilization in their PowerShot SX10 IS and their higher end PowerShot G10.

    Another thing that neither of the Nikon's have is an optical view finder. The L100 has no view finder at all, while the P90 only has an electronic view finder. View finders are great for giving you a more stable photo. Lets face it, with the camera pressed against your face its not going to shake as much as it would if you held it at arm's length.

    And the problem with electronic view finders (as well as the normal LCD screen), is there's added time delay. This time delay is only a fraction of a second, but if you're at a sporting event trying to zoom in on the ball that was just thrown, or that Nascar flying around the track, you'll have a much harder time catching it then you would with an optical view finder. Of the two Canons I listed, only the G10 has an optical view finder.

    Now both electric and optical viewfinders will come in handy if you're outside in the bright sun. So in this situation the P90 or either Canon would do.

    The last thing that would personally bug me about the two Nikon cameras would be the lack of a mode dial. I find a mode dial to be the simplest way to choose which shooting mode you want. All too often I've been given a camera by someone who has complained that 'it just stopped taking sharp photos' and I look to see that they are no longer in Automatic mode, and they didn't realize it since they'd have to go through various on screen menus. This probably wouldn't be much of an issue for you, but for the Technologificly ChallengedTm it is. I still don't understand why a company has to make things more complicated with menu navigations when a simple dial would do. Yes a dial is more expensive, but come on, what's the cost of that compared to the rest of the camera?

    Those are the only things I would have an issue with. As far as the inner workings, and how the sensor is...I'm not sure. Nikon is a very good name so their product should be decent. And don't get me wrong, there's a lot of good features on those two cameras. It just they wouldn't be my picks.

  15. #1575
    Fluff n Stuff's Avatar
    Fluff n Stuff is offline ♫♪♫♪♪♫♪♫♫♪♫♪♪♫♪♫♪♪
    Joined
    May 2001
    Location
    South Seattle, Wa
    Posts
    12,389

    Re: To our resident camera buffs...

    I just bought the sx10is' little brother... the sx110is. Adorama has refurbs up for $170 or so, and I couldn't resist. I love my 5D, but it IS a bit much $$$ to be dragging around and putting at risk all the time. Not to mention the bulk.

    If you're dead set against the new Canons, check out Panasonic. Their DMC FZ28S has an 18x zoom... equivalent to about 27-486mm, which is really nice at the wide side.

    If MY budget were 500, I'd go with Canon's SX1 to get the Full HD Video. yeah, it's $600, but I always go over budget anyhow.

    If you LIKE wide angle, and macro, and 720p video, and image stabilization, and a totally scary cool f 2.0-2.8 rating... check out Panasonic's DMC-LX3. It's not a 'superzoom' at only 2.5x, but it is getting some awesome reviews 'nStuff.



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •