|
I'm new here, please be gentle This is where you can "introduce yourself". A chance for you as a new member to say hello and for you to tell us about yourselves, your truck and your other interests. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
20-01-2011, 19:26 | #31 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Central England, in the Heart of the Black Country
Vehicle: T2 2004 TDI SE LWB
Posts: 7,740
|
|
20-01-2011, 19:44 | #32 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Devizes Wiltshire
Vehicle: Nissan Note Ntec 1.5
Posts: 14,138
|
|
21-01-2011, 15:42 | #33 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Oldham
Vehicle: Nissan Patrol
Posts: 777
|
Yep, it's the moon alright. So is this .........
I took that with a Pentax K200D using a 45 year old Tamron 400mm lens. Don't get too hung up on makes & models of camera. It really doesn't matter. Just about all DSLRs (and most point & shoots too) are capable of taking superb photos. It's usually the wobbly organic bit behind the viewfinder that lets the camera down rather than the other way round. Andrew |
21-01-2011, 15:54 | #34 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: All hail to the Glove of Love...
Posts: 9,212
|
Quote:
My only argument on the DSLR front is one specific to digital that only really expensive ones fix....and thats contrast. Even with an expensive Nikon using RAW format and good processing software (and I know other people with much more expensive kit with the same issue) its a PITA getting the maximum from a shot these days....oh for the digital equivalent of Kodachrome 64 |
|
21-01-2011, 16:15 | #35 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Central England, in the Heart of the Black Country
Vehicle: T2 2004 TDI SE LWB
Posts: 7,740
|
I may be getting the wrong end of the stick, but that photo of the moon, looks like a fine example of contrast
I want to move up from our digital compacts as they are very limited, the auto settings menu's don't make allowance for things like 'low light' photos and just stick the flash on wether you want it or not. And if you turn it off the pictures aren't too clever. I am hoping moving up will give me more control, and of coure, the slr format a better 'framing' ability. But to be honest i don't have a lot of money to spend on this hobby, without getting it in the neck fomr 'her indoors' so It will take a while before i buy anything at all. |
21-01-2011, 16:16 | #36 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Manchester
Vehicle: Ford Maverick 2.7 LWB GLX
Posts: 1,519
|
any one who has an aquarium and is into photography will understand this
these were the best pics i managed out of my bridge camera with the colors as you see them with the naked eye was made worse by night light blue lol this is what was seen with the eye but the rocks weren't so red this is where a dslr was really handy to have but with the cost of running a tank and only using the camera for the fishy photos i couldn't justify the expense |
21-01-2011, 16:16 | #37 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Oldham
Vehicle: Nissan Patrol
Posts: 777
|
I'm not sure that's true.
Here's a few more photos .......... one was taken with a mobile phone; one with a 1.3Mpx Olympus point & shoot; one with a Ricoh KR10 35mm film camera and one with a Pentax K200D DSLR and 18-55mm kit lens. I'm not sure it's at all obvious which is which. (Promise me you won't look at the EXIF data). Deer .... Amaryllis .... Cuthbertson at Lix Toll garage near Killin ..... Horse & sheep .... Wales Software for editing (improving?) photos is dead cheap these days - Photoshop Elements will do everything you need for less than 50 squids. Andrew |
21-01-2011, 16:44 | #38 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: All hail to the Glove of Love...
Posts: 9,212
|
Yeah but I'm just fussy.....
I'm guessing the sheep is the 1.3 megapixies....and I haven't looked so probably wrong and its the Landy. |
21-01-2011, 16:51 | #39 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Central England, in the Heart of the Black Country
Vehicle: T2 2004 TDI SE LWB
Posts: 7,740
|
that's somehting else i could do with, decent photo software!
|
21-01-2011, 16:56 | #40 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: All hail to the Glove of Love...
Posts: 9,212
|
seriously, Picasa has a lot of the enhancement tools the average snapper needs and their default auto levels are pretty good....oh and its free of course, always a bonus!
Its not something a concerned professional would use necessarily but its easy and very good. |
21-01-2011, 16:57 | #41 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Central England, in the Heart of the Black Country
Vehicle: T2 2004 TDI SE LWB
Posts: 7,740
|
Quote:
|
|
21-01-2011, 17:01 | #42 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: All hail to the Glove of Love...
Posts: 9,212
|
|
21-01-2011, 17:32 | #43 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Oldham
Vehicle: Nissan Patrol
Posts: 777
|
Picasa hangs on some XP boxes (it did on mine). If it does on yours, try Photoscape. It also is free, excellent & doesn't hang - it's possibly more complete than Picasa too.
So still no real idea which photos were taken by which cameras?? If you aren't sure (without cheating and looking at the EXIFs) then maybe it doesn't matter as much as some think. (Clue: the Cuthbertson shot is a scan from a 35mm Fuji Reala negative). Andrew |
|
|