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

Discussion in 'Photography' started by cpunk, Sep 22, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. cpunk

    cpunk LE Moderator

    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.
  2. Ravers

    Ravers LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    Good idea.

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

    Some of my recent stuff:

  3. Ravers

    Ravers LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

  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:

    • Like Like x 1
  5. Auld-Yin

    Auld-Yin LE Reviewer Book Reviewer Reviews Editor


    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.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Auld-Yin

    Auld-Yin LE Reviewer Book Reviewer Reviews Editor

    I like the way you photshopped the red lights into white ones :)
    • Like Like x 1
  7. :) I was having a Toulouse Lautrec moment that night!
  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. 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. Tool. Yup, let's call it f4?


    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.
  11. Ravers

    Ravers LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    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. 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)
  13. Are we talking about optical zoom over digital zoom?
  14. Definitely.

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

    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. 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.