Professional Web Applications Themes

Finally did it! - Photography

I finally got my order in for a D70 with the kit (from a reputable dealer at a good price). I'm having all my older lenses converted to use with the new camera, and I'm looking forward to my adventures in high-end digital photography -- my old Sony digital is giving me all kinds of problems. I just wanted to thank everyone for answering all my stupid questions, and thanks to everyone who even e-mailed me images and set me straight on where to buy. I guess this is just the beginning of my visits to this newsgroup. I used ...

  1. #1

    Default Finally did it!

    I finally got my order in for a D70 with the kit (from a reputable dealer at
    a good price). I'm having all my older lenses converted to use with the new
    camera, and I'm looking forward to my adventures in high-end digital
    photography -- my old Sony digital is giving me all kinds of problems.

    I just wanted to thank everyone for answering all my stupid questions, and
    thanks to everyone who even e-mailed me images and set me straight on where
    to buy.

    I guess this is just the beginning of my visits to this newsgroup. I used
    to take photos for a living, and I'm very excited about getting back into
    photography again.

    Thanks.

    Sheldon
    net


    Sheldon Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: Finally did it!

    Sheldon wrote:
     

    That would take an H1 with a 22 Mpix back or something along those lines.


    --
    -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
    -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
    -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
    -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
    Alan Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: Finally did it!


    "Alan Browne" <ca> wrote in message
    news:csm8qd$hkt$gazeta.pl...
    | Sheldon wrote:
    |
    | > camera, and I'm looking forward to my adventures in high-end digital
    | > photography
    |
    | That would take an H1 with a 22 Mpix back or something along those lines.
    |
    |
    | --
    | -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
    | -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
    | -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
    | -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.

    High-end is a relative term. Going from a Brownie to a 110 camera looks like
    high end to the person with the Brownie. To Alan, the D70 is high-end, as it
    is to a lot of people.

    Rick


    Rick Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: Finally did it!

    Rick wrote: 

    Nope. To Alan, the D70 is pretty basic DSLR.

    Cheers,
    Alan


    --
    -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
    -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
    -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
    -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
    Alan Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: Finally did it!


    "Alan Browne" <ca> wrote in message
    news:csm8qd$hkt$gazeta.pl... 
    >
    > That would take an H1 with a 22 Mpix back or something along those lines.
    >[/ref]


    I disagree. I would call D70 a high-end digital camera. I would also
    consider my Canon 20D high end. I would consider a Canon 1Ds MkII a full pro
    camera. A porsche carrera turbo is a high end sports car, but it is not a
    professional race car.

    It may be just terminology, but I consider digital cameras into the
    following categories

    P&S compact - eg Canon SD300
    P&S prosumer - eg Olympus C-8080
    SLR consumer/high-end - Canon 300D
    SLR high end - Canon 20D, Nikon D70 (borderline)
    SLR professional - Canon 1Dx, Nikon D2X

    D70 and 10D are less high end than 20D because they are older and are not as
    fast. But 20D is a VERY fast camera and with a rich set of features to the
    point that I have seen pros use them. I have seen pros shoot with 10D.

    With anything you have to distinguish high-end from professional. If
    spending over $2000 on a body and lens is not high-end, then what is?


    Musty Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: Finally did it!

    Musty wrote:
     
    >>
    >>That would take an H1 with a 22 Mpix back or something along those lines.
    >>[/ref]
    >
    >
    >
    > I disagree. I would call D70 a high-end digital camera. I would also
    > consider my Canon 20D high end. I would consider a Canon 1Ds MkII a full pro
    > camera. A porsche carrera turbo is a high end sports car, but it is not a
    > professional race car.[/ref]

    Whatever a Porche is or isn't is very immaterial. In photography, 35mm (where
    these 70D's and Canon 20D's evolve from) is not high end. It has its high end
    in cameras like the EOS-1v, F5 and Maxxum 9, but the 20D, D70 and Max 7D do not
    in any way measure up to the capabilities of the film 'kings'. And those film
    kings in 35mm are certainly not 'high end' in photography in any sense.
     

    The Hassy H1 is an SLR. 6x6 cm film or smaller 22 mpix digital. That's high
    end. (And there are scanning backs that go much higher).

     

    You'll see pros shoot with lesser cameras than that. But if they have
    commercial accounts for advertising, etc., they will need MF.
     

    $2000 on a body and a lens? That's toyland where pros are concerned. Pros, or
    their companies, are buying $4000 - $8000 full frame DSLR's. The top of this
    range, the 1Ds Mk II is encroaching on MF. That is definitely high end where
    "35mm" ish DSLR's are concerned. The D70 is a relative toy.

    It depends on the profession.

    With the 1Ds Mk II or even the recent Nikon 12 Mpix, one has the tools one would
    expect to satisfy many, but not all pros.

    Product photographers and others cannot do their work with less than a MF camera
    (film or digital). The cameras that we talk about most here in this ng are the
    6-8 Mpix cameras that Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Olympus and finally K-M are
    targetting at amateurs of all stripes and 'lower end' professionals who do not
    need large enlargements. Surely the number of pixels will increase over time,
    but so it will for 'high end' cameras. There will always be a gap, as there is
    in most domains.

    It is no different really from the fact that professionals in the pre-digital
    era used mainly MF and LF cameras for serious commercial work in advertising,
    modeling, weddings, architecture, landscape, etc. 35mm was not enough for many
    applications then, and it isn't any more applicable now. For sports it is
    highly applicable, but most pro photogs have been shooting the high end Canons
    and Nikons, not the consumer cameras.

    I don't mean to put down the consumer oriented cameras, I hope to get a Maxxum
    7D soon myslef. But despite my esoteric collection of glass, it will not be any
    more 'high end' than my pro Maxxum 9 35mm body is with the same collection of
    glass. Same goes for the 70D+any collection of glass or the Canon 10D/20D and
    any collection of glass. Fine enough, but not 'high end'.

    Cheers,
    Alan

    --
    -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
    -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
    -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
    -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
    Alan Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: Finally did it!


    "Alan Browne" <ca> wrote in message
    news:csmhjj$2ot$gazeta.pl... [/ref][/ref]
    lines. 
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > I disagree. I would call D70 a high-end digital camera. I would also
    > > consider my Canon 20D high end. I would consider a Canon 1Ds MkII a full[/ref][/ref]
    pro [/ref]

    >
    > Whatever a Porche is or isn't is very immaterial. In photography, 35mm[/ref]
    (where 
    end 
    do not 
    film 
    >
    > The Hassy H1 is an SLR. 6x6 cm film or smaller 22 mpix digital. That's[/ref]
    high [/ref]
    not as [/ref]
    the 
    >
    > You'll see pros shoot with lesser cameras than that. But if they have
    > commercial accounts for advertising, etc., they will need MF.

    >
    > $2000 on a body and a lens? That's toyland where pros are concerned.[/ref]
    Pros, or 
    this 
    where 
    would 
    camera 
    are the 
    not 
    time, 
    there is 
    pre-digital 
    advertising, 
    many 
    Canons 
    Maxxum 
    be any 
    of 
    and 

    The thread is concerning digital SLR only - not 35mm or MF cameras, and
    again you keep bringing a professional context in (I completely agree with u
    that the 20D is below par compared to the cameras which you mention).
    High-end is a consumer concept, so these _are_ high end digital cameras, but
    not professional. And $2000+ on a consumer camera is about as high as people
    will spend (definitely not $8000 body - with another $20K on lenses - its
    just not worth it for consumers and hobbyists). I am not naive about what
    pros can spend on equipment. I would rather (and have) put my money into
    things like property and investments since my profession is an an engineer
    and not a photographer. I get excellent results with my 20D and 2 lenses
    (17-85 and 70-200 f/4L). I plan to get more L glass in the near future.
    So for a hobbyist like myself (and probably many others on this group) -
    professional equipment is just that - its professional. BTW, I plan to buy
    a "pro" body once they reach the $4K level - any higher and its not worth it
    for me. I think I will have to wait about 2 years to get a 1Ds MkII like
    camera for that price.

    I think it is just terminology. You are saying:

    high-end == professional

    I am saying

    1) high-end == "top of the line" consumer (20D is top of the line consumer -
    in my opinion).
    2) professional == a level above that and for only very few consumers





    Musty Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: Finally did it!

    Musty wrote:
     
    <snip>

    Learn to snip. And no, I don't agree with you.

    Cheers,
    Alan.


    --
    -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
    -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
    -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
    -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
    Alan Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: Finally did it!

    I remember a few years ago a 3-4Mp Pro was High end, now there not worth
    much, the D70 or 20D makes a much better picture than the older High end
    Digitals.
    The camera does not make the Pro, its how the camera is used.




    "Musty" <net> wrote in message
    news:0gAHd.34927$texas.rr.com... [/ref]
    > lines. [/ref][/ref]
    full [/ref][/ref]
    not 
    > >
    > > Whatever a Porche is or isn't is very immaterial. In photography, 35mm[/ref]
    > (where [/ref]
    high 
    > do not [/ref]
    those 
    > >
    > > The Hassy H1 is an SLR. 6x6 cm film or smaller 22 mpix digital. That's[/ref]
    > high [/ref]
    > not as [/ref]
    > the 
    > >
    > > You'll see pros shoot with lesser cameras than that. But if they have
    > > commercial accounts for advertising, etc., they will need MF.
    > > 
    > >
    > > $2000 on a body and a lens? That's toyland where pros are concerned.[/ref]
    > Pros, or 
    > this 
    > where [/ref]
    one [/ref]
    MF 
    > are the [/ref]
    do 
    > time, 
    > there is 
    > pre-digital 
    > advertising, [/ref]
    for [/ref]
    is 
    > Canons 
    > Maxxum [/ref]
    not [/ref]
    collection [/ref]
    10D/20D 
    >
    > The thread is concerning digital SLR only - not 35mm or MF cameras, and
    > again you keep bringing a professional context in (I completely agree with[/ref]

    but 
    people 
    buy 
    it 
    consumer - 


    Jimbo Guest

  10. #10

    Default Re: Finally did it!


    "Alan Browne" <ca> wrote in message
    news:csmkkh$h01$gazeta.pl... 
    > <snip>
    >
    > Learn to snip. And no, I don't agree with you.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > Alan.[/ref]

    Umm, lets do a context check here:

    NG name : r.p.digital.slr-systems (dont see anything about 35mm or MF in
    that name).
    More important (the OP said): "I'm looking forward to my adventures in
    high-end digital
    photography". Thats right "digital".

    So you may not agree that this thread is about digital SLR (or perhaps you
    are just dis-agreeing with me in general), but the context does not lie.
    Only _you_ have brought in talk of professional film medium format
    photgraphy, film "kings", et al.

    Anyway, I will just go on merrily in my naive bliss and snap away with my
    consumer grade POS 20D. Its funny, but a very good friend of mine who _is_ a
    pro photographer has very good things to say about the 20D and "instructed"
    me to not even consider going the 1D/1Ds route (tried to keep me sane).


    Musty Guest

  11. #11

    Default Re: Finally did it!

    Musty wrote: 

    Musty is correct; Alan, tho, will not budge. So says a fiver.

    --
    John McWilliams
    John Guest

  12. #12

    Default Re: Finally did it!


    "Jimbo" <net> wrote in message
    news:com... 

    Stricky speaking in marketing terms, of course, Canon calls the "1" series
    line the "pro" cameras, similar I think as Nikon have done with their
    single-digit naming scheme for their pro models.


    Dave Guest

  13. #13

    Default Re: Finally did it!

    On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:23:23 -0700, "Sheldon" <net>
    wrote:
     

    You're welcome - you're gonna LOVE yer D70!

    Bob Guest

  14. #14

    Default Re: Finally did it!


    "Alan Browne" <ca> wrote in message
    news:csm8qd$hkt$gazeta.pl... 
    >
    > That would take an H1 with a 22 Mpix back or something along those lines.[/ref]

    I understand what you are saying, but from where I'm coming from this IS
    high-end. I just want/need a camera that will take superior photos and one
    that gives me far more control than I have now. I desperately need more
    control over focus and depth of field, and this should give it to me, along
    with the ability to take photos that can be published. I can always fall
    back on my film Nikons if necessary, but having a chance to use my favorite
    lenses on a digital camera should be a lot of fun.

    As for some of the other comments: Today's newer cameras may give the
    photographer more time to spend composing, but an awful lot of great photos
    were taken with manual cameras and light meters. The camera can help, but
    it's the photographer that makes a great photo. Yeah, if you can shoot 20
    fps at a sporting event your good photos are just dumb luck, IMO.

    I've had Hasselblads (sp?) and 4x5s, but my best work was always done with a
    35mm SLR. And, if you can believe it, I shot some photos for a magazine
    with a 1.2megapixel P&S Sony. While I certainly could have used more
    megapixels, the photos themselves were great. Fortunately, they didn't have
    to be n up very much for the article, and the 8x10s I made looked
    "pretty" good if you didn't put your nose up to them.

    I do a lot of PowerPoint presentations (thank god this thing is deductible),
    and it's far more camera than I need for that, except my photos can be more
    creative now.

    Thanks again.

    Sheldon 


    Sheldon Guest

  15. #15

    Default Re: Finally did it!

    Alan Browne wrote:

    <rubish snipped> 

    <Rubbish snipped>

    The "product posters" at this link http://www.tecphoto.com.au/example.htm
    were shot with a Nikon D100 by a full time professional photographer who
    didn't even use full camera resolution or RAW capture for the work. He
    knows we could enlarge his images just as long as they were focused
    correctly. Image sensor density has very little to do with image
    quality. Just like it always has been, the camera only hold the lens.

    The client of the photographer who took these images is ecstatic with
    the sharp, clear, full resolution 24" x 36" posters we created, just
    like all our clients are amazed and satisfied with our posters and
    catalogues. Hi-end digital enlargements from cameras "targeted at
    amateurs". Gives the comparison between film and digital a wee bit of a
    different slant in the real world than the world of Alan Browne's mind.

    You really do need to get out more Alan. The world of Professional
    Photography is a lot different to the one in your mind. My digital print
    centre does work for about 40, full time professional photographers and
    two newspapers who use our facilities for printing their sales photos
    larger than A4 size.

    I'm the only one still using medium format gear and even then, I use
    digital for 60% of my work too. The only grip I have with my "High end"
    D20 and 1D is they can't handle the extremes of climate that my old
    Mamiya's can. Oddly enough, my ratty old SD9 Sigma keeps going when the
    Canon's die. Pity about the pics!

    This post is not intended as a commercial post to a group whose charter
    forbids it. I have provided the link above which has no advertising in
    it except to promote the process we developed to enlarge digital images
    and this process is not for sale. I simply demonstrates that you don't
    need a $5,000 digital camera to be a professional photographer.

    I felt so strongly that Alan Browne was providing wrong information to
    people which has the potential to cause those people to spend hundreds
    of dollars more than they need to when buying a camera, that I deemed
    this link important in contradicting his statement, otherwise I would
    have continued to withhold my identity and post under "invented" names
    in the spirit of the charter of this group.

    Doug
    Ryadia Guest

  16. #16

    Default Re: Finally did it!

    In article <net>, com says... 

    I have had one of my photos used as a 3' x 4' poster, and it was a crop from
    a shot taken by an 8mp Sony F828. (probably about 6mp, I never checked)

    The shot was made in poor light at the extreme end of the range of the flash
    I was using.

    20 minutes of post work later, it was (to me) only a "passable" 8x10, but the
    Trainer of the horse involved was thrilled with it, and I gave her the photo
    on a CDrom. (its is the only photo I have ever sold the copyright for, but I
    was well compensated for that picture)

    She had it made into a poster to hang at the "Ohio Quarter Horse Congress" to
    help advertise the horse (the worlds largest/longest horse show, 35 thousand
    horses shown over 21 days 24/7) last October. Most of the horses that go
    there are intended to be sold while there.

    The horse was sold for $122,000 during that show.(good price for a 3 year old
    basicly un-proven mare) The trainer credits the poster for getting the buyers
    attention.

    Needless to say, I have been well advertised by "word of mouth" (and the fact
    that she keeps showing that poster all over New England) and I have been
    contacted by enough people to keep me busy this summer.

    The poster was very sharp and very well done, with no noticeable changes from
    my own post work in PhotoShop (my work was mostly curves, and levels, with a
    (very) little unsharp masking) other than whatever algorythm they used to re-
    size it.

    I dont know who did the poster, but it proved to me that 8mp is enough, and
    that the "Point and shoot" camera I was using can be "good enough" for
    commercial work.

    I intend to buy a good DSLR, but Im holding on waiting for one of leaders to
    put "self cleaning" into a better camera than those available with it right
    now (a couple of Olympus models). Horse Shows are a TERRIBLY dusty
    environment, and I dont like to stop and clean the sensor every hour or so.


    --
    Larry Lynch
    Mystic, Ct.
    Larry Guest

  17. #17

    Default Re: Finally did it!

    On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 21:59:19 GMT, you, "Musty" <net>, wrote
    in news:XKAHd.34965$texas.rr.com:
     
    >> <snip>
    >>
    >> Learn to snip. And no, I don't agree with you.
    >>
    >> Cheers,
    >> Alan.[/ref]
    >
    > Umm, lets do a context check here:
    >
    > NG name : r.p.digital.slr-systems (dont see anything about 35mm or MF
    > in that name).
    > More important (the OP said): "I'm looking forward to my adventures in
    > high-end digital
    > photography". Thats right "digital".[/ref]


    An H1 with a 22 Mpix back is both SLR and digital. Also it's arround
    where "high-end digital photography" should be at the moment. Higher-ends
    in consumer stuff is nowhere high enough for digital photography.


    --
    T.N.T.

    Lbh xabj jung gb qb vs lbh rire jnag gb rznvy zr.
    T.N.T. Guest

  18. #18

    Default Re: Finally did it!

    On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 13:27:26 -0500, in rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Alan
    Browne <ca> wrote:
     
    >
    >That would take an H1 with a 22 Mpix back or something along those lines.[/ref]

    You obviously haven't seen the work of Max Lyons, beginning with the
    "lowly" Nikon CP-990.

    http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/
    ----------
    Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 (Ruf.com)
    See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
    http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html
    Ed Guest

  19. #19

    Default Re: Finally did it!

    On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 12:45:27 GMT, you, "T.N.T." <ca>,
    wrote in news:utopia.disorg:

     


    Should have said "nowhere high enough for high-end digital photography".



    --
    T.N.T.

    Lbh xabj jung gb qb vs lbh rire jnag gb rznvy zr.
    T.N.T. Guest

  20. #20

    Default Re: Finally did it!

    Jimbo wrote:
     


    The pj cameras were in that range, but the MF folks were already running up very
    high pixel counts. Further cameras like the Kodak 14 were aiimed at pros.

    It's not only what the pro can do, it is who he doing it for. A 4 Mpix camera
    cannot be used for fashion spreads unless the images are quite small. What
    works for a news photo does not work for a landscape poster... etc.

    While it also true that an idiot cannot do much with the best camera in
    existance, it is equally true that commercial photographers must deliver to
    spec. A low pixel count camera won't meet commercial photography specs.

    Cheers,
    Alan


    --
    -- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
    -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
    -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
    -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
    Alan Guest

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. [PHP-DEV] finally again
    By Cristiano Duarte in forum PHP Development
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: October 26th, 11:30 PM
  2. [PHP-DEV] finally again
    By Andrew Smith in forum PHP Development
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: October 26th, 02:07 PM
  3. [PHP-DEV] finally again
    By Cristiano Duarte in forum PHP Development
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: October 26th, 11:50 AM
  4. [PHP-DEV] finally again
    By Cristiano Duarte in forum PHP Development
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: October 24th, 08:21 PM
  5. [PHP-DEV] finally again
    By Cristiano Duarte in forum PHP Development
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: October 24th, 08:08 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139