• ARRSE have partnered with Armadillo Merino to bring you an ARRSE exclusive, generous discount offer on their full price range.
    To keep you warm with the best of Merino gear, visit www.armadillomerino.co.uk and use the code: NEWARRSE40 at the checkout to get 40% off!
    This superb deal has been generously offered to us by Armadillo Merino and is valid until midnight on the the 28th of February.

Welcome one and all to the Arrse photography forum...

cpunk

LE
Moderator
#1
This is a venue for discussion of gear, technique, pictures and what not...

Normal rules apply: try to be reasonably polite and don't upload pictures that you wouldn't want to see plastered all over the web, being used as evidence for the prosecution etc etc etc.
 

Ravers

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#2
Good idea.

I'm rocking a Nikon D5000 with a standard lens at present and I love it.

Some of my recent stuff:




 
#4
Nice Phots Ravers.

I'm now on an EOS 5D with some L Series Lenses.

Photo below isn't intended to show great composition or other skills, merely the way that the camera and 24-105mm Image stabilised f1.4 lens took a reasonable shot in the dead of night in the hands of a drunken buffoon:

IMG_6628.jpg
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#5
Dinger

I hope you take this suggestion the way it is intended. If you have some spare time on your hands, do you think you could approach some of the camera makers, explain your issues and ask them? Let them know that you would be willing to trial any cameras/gadgets that they would come up with. What you might get from that is either the chance to be involved in designing kit for specific purposes or they may point you in the direction of some kit they have out already.

Just a thought, and it may not go anywhere, but you never know, maybe nobody has asked Kodak or Sony about these things before.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#6
Nice Phots Ravers.

I'm now on an EOS 5D with some L Series Lenses.

Photo below isn't intended to show great composition or other skills, merely the way that the camera and 24-105mm Image stabilised f1.4 lens took a reasonable shot in the dead of night in the hands of a drunken buffoon:

View attachment 35011
I like the way you photshopped the red lights into white ones :)
 
#8
Being a complete camera mong, for an average camera user, what is the recommended number of pixels I should go for?

Do I really need a gazillion mega pixels or is the steady increase in camera pixel numbers a ploy to sell a level of technology that is not required by the average user?
 
#9
Nice Phots Ravers.
...-105mm Image stabilised f1.4 lens...
Didn't know Canon made a 24-105 F1.4 :)


Dinger, AuldY has a suggestion. I know that there are mouth-operated camera shutter releases for (at least) Canon kit. They are desigend for the parachuting community. The "consumer" DSLR cameras usually are lighter as well. I would say that most non-SLR's would need at least the ball of your thumb on your right hand. Not knowing the full extent of your disability, the problems may lie in ATTACHING current accessories to the camera body, rather than the need to design from NEW, ie. to attach wired remote controls, you need to be able to open small doors (usually made of rubber or silicone).

*** Sorry to edit - the G10 and G11 are heavy compared to the some of the credit-card sized cameras, which MAY be a consideration in Dinger's case ***
 
#10
Didn't know Canon made a 24-105 F1.4 :)


Dinger, AuldY has a suggestion. I know that there are mouth-operated camera shutter releases for (at least) Canon kit. They are desigend for the parachuting community. The "consumer" DSLR cameras usually are lighter as well. I would say that most non-SLR's would need at least the ball of your thumb on your right hand. Not knowing the full extent of your disability, the problems may lie in ATTACHING current accessories to the camera body, rather than the need to design from NEW, ie. to attach wired remote controls, you need to be able to open small doors (usually made of rubber or silicone).

*** Sorry to edit - the G10 and G11 are heavy compared to the some of the credit-card sized cameras, which MAY be a consideration in Dinger's case ***
Tool. Yup, let's call it f4?

Dingerr,

Fully agreed with Tool's comments. I find those little rubber covers a PITA. There are cameras now with wifi. Perhaps they're worth exploring to avoid the hassle of cables and fiddly things.
 

Ravers

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#11
Being a complete camera mong, for an average camera user, what is the recommended number of pixels I should go for?

Do I really need a gazillion mega pixels or is the steady increase in camera pixel numbers a ploy to sell a level of technology that is not required by the average user?
I'd say lens quality is more important. In this day and age where you can get a 12 mega pixel camera for under seventy quid, it doesn't make a huge difference unless you want to take massive phots. For example, Sony do a nice range of cameras, half of them have Sony lenses and are OK, the other half have Carl Zeiss lenses which are top notch and noticeably a lot better, but more pricey.

I have a Sony compact jobby for work, it's 12 mega pixels with a Sony lens and is not bad at all. My boss uses a similar but slightly older Sony with only 8 mega pixels but it has a Zeiss lens, his one takes much better pictures.
 
#12
Being a complete camera mong, for an average camera user, what is the recommended number of pixels I should go for?

Do I really need a gazillion mega pixels or is the steady increase in camera pixel numbers a ploy to sell a level of technology that is not required by the average user?
Pixels are a ploy IMHO. Better bet is to go for sensor size - a full size sensor (equivalent to 35mm) will mostly give better results.

Everthing is debatable in the camera world, but I tend to go for lens quality first, followed by body suitability (why buy a mahoosive top of the range jobby for party snaps), followed by tech specs of the body. Debate at will, but that's my path.

(edited to add that Ravers beat me to lens quality)
 
#14
Are we talking about optical zoom over digital zoom?
Definitely.

But also you'll find a lot of other aspects of photography that are mainly affected by the lens and not the body.

e.g.
When you take a wide angle shot on cheap lenses the image will be distorted (parallax error).
With some lenses where contrasts of colour or light occur, images will show innacurate pics.
In low light, cheap lenses are, generally, less likely to get enough light to the film or sensor (a full size sensor will help here as it gathers more detail).
 
#15
Are we talking about optical zoom over digital zoom?
Always look at the optical specs, not the digital. A digital zoom is not a real zoom, you will get a very pixalated image on full digital zoom. It's usually camcorders that offer you a high digital zoom (strange selling point) and it's not a great image.
 
#16
Pixels are a ploy IMHO....full size sensor (equivalent to 35mm) will mostly give better results.
lens quality first, followed by body suitability, tech specs of the body.
(edited to add that Ravers beat me to lens quality)
Yep, agree entirely. A reasonable-quality 10Mp camera can give you an A3-sized image without much problem, and a full-frame 21Mp camera will get to a 6ft x 4ft print.

Fullily enough, a recent test by one of the large tog magazines only gave Nikon full-frame cameras an advantage at higher ISO's over their APS-C brothers, whereas the Canon full-framed 5DMk II knocked socks off the (APS-C) Canon 50D throughout the range.
 
#17
I've been using an 8 Mp Olympus E-300 for 3 years and the image dimensions fit nicely onto an A3 sheet of photo paper. (FWIW, I use an Epson SP 1400 printer for A3 work and the prints cost between £4 and £5 depending on paper cost and whether or not I take advantage of discounts for multiple purchases of ink cartridges.) However, printing at A3 shows up defects in your pics in HORRIBLE detail! Particularly camera shake.....

My hands are not as steady as they used to be (drink and arthritis) and I need to use a tripod more often these days for rock-steady pictures. I'm thinking of upgrading to an Olympus E-620 in the New Year because of its Image Stabilisation capability. Image Stab, hopefully, will let me take hand-held pics again.

Anybody else in the same boat? Is Image Stabilisation as good as it's cracked up to be? Any recommendations for other cameras with Image Stab?
 
#18
...I have a Sony compact jobby for work, it's 12 mega pixels with a Sony lens and is not bad at all. My boss uses a similar but slightly older Sony with only 8 mega pixels but it has a Zeiss lens, his one takes much better pictures.
I have a cyber-shot kicking around here but sadly the quality Zeiss opticals are ruined by the high level of compression used and with no way of altering the compression level or indeed turning it off. A real shame otherwise it would have been a very nice camera for its size/price.

But agree with you that the quality of the lens is of paramount importance in photography whether it's digital or conventional film.
 
#19
The kit lens that came with my Canon was at best OK, I nearly stopped bothering with photography because I could never quite get the sharp image I was after. Then I bought a better quality Canon lens, now I have sharp pictures.

I'll not use the kit lens again.
 
#20
Cpunk,

You've come up with a winner with this forum - pedantry, endless scope for petty arguments, and the chance for real men to brag about their shiney toys (err). Perfect, thanks.
 

Latest Threads