DSLR Cameras?

[G26ster]

My first camera was an Argus Seventy-Five. I got it for Christmas when I was eight years old.

Here's one of may favorites I used sparingly for many years. Kodak 5x7 View Camera (circa 1903). Not exactly a "pocket camera."

[flintknapper]

Love those bellows!

[Spluloacle]

So I did get the Canon T1i for Christmas and a 50mm f/1.8 II lens. My DH consulted a pro friend of mine which makes me stoked. I need a speedlight though. I take a lot of indoor shots and I know how to get consistently good shots with that. I will also eventually get a good zoom lens. Then I will be done for a few years.

[steve817]

So I did get the Canon T1i for Christmas and a 50mm f/1.8 II lens. My DH consulted a pro friend of mine which makes me stoked. I need a speedlight though. I take a lot of indoor shots and I know how to get consistently good shots with that. I will also eventually get a good zoom lens. Then I will be done for a few years.

Spend the extra and get the 580EX II speedlight if you can. Accessing the flash menu on the camera can be a bit of a pain. On the 580 you can make the adjustments on the back of the flash unit.

[steve817]

G26ster - Very good explanation.
I have heard the same questions about what kind of camera, lens, exposure, film, etc. A good shooting/hunting analogy would be when a person shoots a trophy buck and is asked what kind of gun, scope, what grain bullet, etc.

I am reluctant to post this, but I think that the NYIP (New York Institute of Photography) course is a good way for a beginning photographer to learn the basics. Buy any photography magazine and there will be full page advertisments from the school. When I took the course, many years ago, I found it to be very good. The course covers, in detail, all of the subjects that G26ster talks about in his posts. IMO, if you complete all of the course material and exercises, it would be equivalent to getting an AA degree in photography. Obviously, you don't get college credit, but I believe that the knowledge and experience would be comparable. You don't get the face-to-face feedback as you would from other classes, but when I took the class the instructors would evaluate your assignments and send a cassette tape with their comments.

I have a couple of reservations about this course. It was very expensive for my budget, but you can complete it at your own pace. The course material was a bit outdated. Since I took it, I have heard that have revised the course to include digital photography and video. The few pieces of equipment that they supplied was low quality. I don't know the current price, but it may be worth checking them out.

I came close to taking that course when I got into it. I would have came closer if I had only shot film. The beauty of digital is that you can pull it up almost instantly on a PC and see what works and what doesn't. That in combination with the fact that there is so much free information floating around on the net put me over in the "Don't do it" camp.

I believe it was mentioned earlier, don't skimp on lenses. I have a couple of Canon L lenses. My wife thought I was insane when I purchased them. Once she saw what I could do with them, she quickly changed her tune. After four years they have held about 80% of their value. Wish I could say the same for the camera body.

[KD5NRH]

When I said "obsolete" I was not trying to imply that they could no longer be used. The point I was trying to make was to spend your money more on glass and less on the camera body. I actually advocate buying used older generation camera bodies.

This is why I've stuck with Sony for my DSLR; they bought out the old Minolta lines and kept everything compatible with my Minolta AF glass. It also means that I only need one of each lens even when I'm carrying the Alpha and two Minolta film bodies. I also got lucky recently and got a 50mm f/1.7 and a 70-210mm f/4 for free because the previous owner didn't think they were even worth mentioning on the deal. I guess he didn't check eBay; those two lenses together would bring around $300-350 used.

1. Shoot film. Your digital pictures unless printed in black and white probably won't be here for your grandkids.

Make sure you archive those digital photos well, too, and keep the film negatives in labeled envelopes. One of the things that bugs me about some of the family negatives I've been scanning in is that noone alive knows who some of the people in those photos are. Digital at least makes it easy to pin down the date of the shot, and most file formats have something along the lines of a notes field where you can put in extra information. This is one reason I also like to get my film scanned in fairly quickly; having the date on the scan be at least close to the actual date the photo was taken can narrow things down for those who find the photos later.

2. Focus and properly expose. That's much easier now with digital, but see above.

Somewhat easier, but no amount of postproduction work can put back information that isn't there to begin with. Missed focus is pretty much permanent, and missing the exposure by too much will result in lost detail in either shadow or highlight. Knowing how to use the camera you have is key here; even an older point and shoot camera can do a lot if you have the right features and know how to make them work for the situation at hand. This is a very low light shot with a 5MP Canon S2 IS that I picked up at a pawn shop for $100; I know a lot of the people that had nice SLRs with them that day have nothing that will compare with this, simply because they didn't have tripods with them, and left their cameras on auto modes that just can't handle such an extreme situation.

FWIW, an 8x10 of this is hanging over my shoulder right now and it looks just as good as some of the shots from my 10MP cameras. There's an 11x14 of it over my wife's desk that shows no pixellation until you're in danger of getting noseprints on the glass.

3. Move in closer. Once you have decided the photo your going to take, move in closer and take it again, this one will be better.

To an extent. There's a reason a lot of great portraits are taken with 50-85mm primes; you have to move to a good distance to frame the shot well with them.

5. Take pictures of things that will change with time. That is the magic of photography. For this reason take photographs with cars in them. Sure take a picture with mom and the kids without your family car in the photograph, but trust me your son when he is old will appreciate the one with the car in it more.

This also goes back to number one; the car or the house may be what jogs someone's memory as to who the people are or what year the photo was taken. We're expecting another baby soon, and without the scan date on this file and the information on the envelope the negative is in, for example, there's no way I could be sure that I'll remember which one it was 20years from now.

8. I know sometimes your are rushed, but try and take at least a few photos stopped outside of the moving car you are riding in.

This is one of the reasons I want to do some serious bicycle touring someday; it's easy to stop for a minute and get a few shots when you're only doing 15MPH anyway. A wireless remote makes it a lot easier to get yourself in the shot too; no rushing to try to beat a 10 second timer.

I just want to point out that you can print your digital pictures if you are so inclined. You don't to shoot film to get prints.

And even if you do shoot film, unless you specifically track down one of the few processors who will still darkroom print your photos, any prints you get back will be inkjet prints of your scanned negatives. The quality of the ink used will determine how long these will last.

One site that should also be mentioned in any "help me pick a camera" thread is http://www.dpreview.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[steve817]

The issues with print longevity can be overcome by using a good print service like Mpix. They use lamda printers which fire the digital info onto actual photographic paper which is then processed pretty much the same way a print from a negative is. I can do the "Pepsi challenge" with a print done from film and one done from digital and I guarantee few if any would be able to tell the difference.

A former acquaintance of mine who was a photographer turned me on to the process. He would do weddings but didn't really like to. On his website he discussed the process and said that even though he shot digital, his prints would outlast most marriages...even the good ones.

They are more expensive of course. A 4x5 runs about 29 cents compared to the 19 cents you will pay at CVS but it is worth it. Costco uses the same process and they don't charge as much but the results are hit and miss. The one here in Arlington does a pretty good job.

[KD5NRH]

A former acquaintance of mine who was a photographer turned me on to the process. He would do weddings but didn't really like to. On his website he discussed the process and said that even though he shot digital, his prints would outlast most marriages...even the good ones.

I've got dot-matrix printouts that will outlast most marriages these days.

For that matter, the Canon Chromalife ink I use at home is supposed to be rated for 100 years in normal use. (Presumably, this would mean framed or otherwise protected from handling and out of direct sunlight.) Probably longer in albums where the prints are protected from light except when actually being viewed. Most good quality photo printers will make a print that anybody who doesn't spend a lot of time closely examining prints won't be able to tell from a darkroom print. Fooling the rest of us is, realistically, less of a priority outside the marketing department.

[steve817]

I got a little off track. My point was that the end product is the same.

[KD5NRH]

I got a little off track. My point was that the end product is the same.

In general, yes, but there are some other things to bear in mind for printing. I generally use SmugMug for my best photos because they have the fastest customer service and the best guarantees of any of the sites I tried. All products on the lower account tiers go through EZPrints, and I've never had a problem with those. Before I dropped my Pro membership, I did have a few printed through both EZPrints and Bay Photo, and I could only tell the difference with the photos side by side in full sunlight. The only thing they don't offer is panoramic prints. (You can use the "no crop" option to print a panorama on a larger paper size and cut the blank areas off yourself, but it's not usually cost effective for really wide shots. IIRC, printing direct through EZPrints and MPix will allow panoramas with the small dimension being any standard size of photo paper roll stock, and charging by the inch of the long dimension.)

If you don't mind tying up your internet connection with the uploads, their unlimited storage is worthwhile. I don't upload every "keeper" but I've known several pros who do, and have terabytes of photos on their site without any problems. (So it's not the "unlimited unless you actually try to use a lot" like some ISPs used to be.) $40 per year (though the Power account at $60 does offer some nice features like custom layouts) for an unlimited offsite backup of all your family photos isn't too bad in the long run. If anybody wants to set up an account, PM me and I'll track down a $5 discount URL for you. I think they're still offering free Pro level accounts for some non-profit and educational organizations, too, and that's an excellent way to get your scout troop or chess club's photos online, especially if you have a lot of people taking pictures, since the Pro account allows assistant passwords so everybody can upload their own shots for the primary user to arrange.

The big benefit of SmugMug for printing is the color correction that they offer. Getting the color perfect on an uncalibrated monitor is like trying to zero a scope without a rest. I'm not sure exactly how their correction works, but the only time it has ever failed to do a better job than I did was a shot that had an intentional color cast removed when I forgot to uncheck the correction box. Even then, they got it looking pretty good :)

[steve817]

I'm with you on the color correction thing. MPix has served me well in that regard and the best part is, I don't have to mess with it. I used EZprints years ago. It was the first one I used as a matter of fact. It had been so long since I used them, I forgot the name of the company until you brought it up. I went to MPix because I wanted to check out the metallic surface prints they offer and ended up liking all of their services.

Even though I have some nice photography toys, I am by no means a professional so what they offer works for me. Others mileage may vary.

[KD5NRH]

I'm with you on the color correction thing. MPix has served me well in that regard and the best part is, I don't have to mess with it. I used EZprints years ago. It was the first one I used as a matter of fact. It had been so long since I used them, I forgot the name of the company until you brought it up. I went to MPix because I wanted to check out the metallic surface prints they offer and ended up liking all of their services.

EZPrints is offering metallics now. Looks great on astrophotos, B&W film scans and some architecture shots.

[MatthewKrauss]

DSLR (digital SLR) camera usesd to belong to a category of professional photographers. But now, because of the high-quality images they afford, demand is growing in the mass market. Entry-level DSLR cameras are now designed to take professional pictures and put it in a device that is simple and easy to use, even for those who are only familiar with compact cameras.

[steve817]

DSLR (digital SLR) camera usesd to belong to a category of professional photographers. But now, because of the high-quality images they afford, demand is growing in the mass market. Entry-level DSLR cameras are now designed to take professional pictures and put it in a device that is simple and easy to use, even for those who are only familiar with compact cameras.

You always could in goof proof "auto" mode. I think the biggest factor in their popularity is the fact that the prices have come way down. There was a time when you couldn't touch any DSLR for less than $2000.00. I paid $1300.00 for my first one. That is more than a lot of people are willing to spend for a camera. Sure there were a lot of hard core amateurs who would and that supported the market early on. Now there are models that can be had for under $500.00 and that puts them within reach of a larger chunk of the public.

I still get a chuckle because I know so many people who now have DSLR's and do nothing more with them but set them on auto and fire away. Sure they will capture a good photo, but the camera is capable of so much more. If that is all one intends to do with them why not stick with a compact point and shoot?

ETA: By the way KD5NRH, I'm digging the cave shot.

[KD5NRH]

ETA: By the way KD5NRH, I'm digging the cave shot.

Thanks. The trick was finding a P&S that offered a good aperture priority mode that would actually handle fairly long shutter times. 10 seconds at f/8 was enough for this shot, but there were several others in the cave that needed 15-30 seconds, and a few of the other cameras I looked at only went to 10 seconds in aperture mode.

Carlsbad is easily the most photographer-friendly show cave I've found, with no prohibitions on tripods or monopods, and the rangers were actually holding up crowds to let the few of us with tripods finish up long exposures.