Any photography bods?

iPete

I've been shooting for a few years now and have a tasty lens line up. Problem is, I don't use it enough to justify the value of it all, its fantastic when I use it but that might be every other month.

Has anyone got any first hand experience with using a compact DSLR, something like the new Olympus E-P3?

I'm used to throwing around a 40D + 17-55 f/2.8 IS + 430EX flash and can't help but think I'd regret selling it every time I try to AF?!

Paul E

Not used any of the compact a bit higher than bridge spec cameras, I know what you mean with weight though, I am used to throwing a 5d with a battery grip and most of the time a canon 70-200 2.8 IS L attached and sometimes a 120-300 2.8 sigma

I did used to do it a bit for a living along with video film work

greg66_tri_v2.0

They're not mutually exclusive. Get the Oly (or something similar) for snapping. Keep your proper glass for photography.

Paging Snooks...

UndercoverElephant

Recently got an Olympus ZX-1 as a camera we can carry around a bit easier than the Sony Alpha with all the lenses. It has a F1.8 Zuiko lens with an effective range of 28-112 mm.

Must admit that I've not used the Sony since. The lens is phenomenal, so sharp and wonderful colours. Yes, the autofocus is slow and sometime inaccurate compared to the Sony, but the quality of some of the shots is remarkable.

snooks

Like bikes, you can never have enough camera :twisted:

I have film cameras for being arty, and sitting in the loft doing nothing, I have a 1dsmkiii and a 5D for work and I have a Leica compact for personal work and happy snaps.

All of them serve different purposes and have different uses.

What do you normally shoot?

If you sell the body you have you won't get as much as you paid for it, and you'll regret it.

My advice would be to go to a camera shop and have a play, see what you think, is it too small to shoot with? What are the menu system like? If you like it get the compact and see how you get on with it before selling your other stuff.

You will take a hit with image quality, no doubts about that, smaller lenses are more vulnerable to chromatic aberration, the refraction of light at the edges leaving a purple edge to highlights, and edge resolution also suffers aat the wider end of the scale.

My Leica gets used when I don't want to hump all my professional gear around. I bought it to go around off to Australia on holiday, and when I'm not carrying camera gear around it is a holiday! Sure there were times when I wanted better equipment, but I adapted my style. But it made me think more about my photography which I loved.

dilemna

I use an old Sony Cybershot DSC P200 7.2Mpeg with a Carl Zeiss lens. Picture quality is brilliant. I hardly use my Canon 40D with various lenses anymore and when I do it is a real struggle feeling I have to. But if truth be told I take far better pics with my little Sony which can be switched to manual as well and is so light and easy to use. No faffing around. Sometimes people get caught up in an arms war of kit they think they must have.

iPete

Suprising amount of shooters!

Truth be told I held an EP-1 a few years ago and wasn't a fan, also used a mini SLR with an electric view finder and hated that!

I'll post up some shots tomorrow when I'm home. Used to shoot lots of coastal landscape and sport but since moving to London it's more social with my mates and weekends away; stitched landscape and low light pub shots. It's certainly been harder no longer having a car and cycling has taken over!

I think I'd miss the AF and view finder too much to sell up, even if I can sell my lenses for what I paid!

Roundandround

Been there. I got rid of some high-end equipment a while back, believing all the hype about compact digitals doing things just as well. And I regretted it very quickly. The fact is that, if you're used to high quality images from good SLR/ DSLR, you WILL be disappointed by the output of almost anything less. I know loads of people who talk about brilliant shots from their digital compacts. When I've seen them, the image quality is rotten.
But, as has been said here, there are horses for courses. It depends what you want and whay you're used to. Some people are over the moon with their £70 bikes from Tesco. If you want a light walkaround, fine, but don't sell the existing rig.

UndercoverElephant

Roundandround wrote:

Been there. I got rid of some high-end equipment a while back, believing all the hype about compact digitals doing things just as well. And I regretted it very quickly. The fact is that, if you're used to high quality images from good SLR/ DSLR, you WILL be disappointed by the output of almost anything less. I know loads of people who talk about brilliant shots from their digital compacts. When I've seen them, the image quality is rotten.
But, as has been said here, there are horses for courses. It depends what you want and whay you're used to. Some people are over the moon with their £70 bikes from Tesco. If you want a light walkaround, fine, but don't sell the existing rig.

A little harsh in my opinion. Some compacts have pretty good optics these days, the sensor may be a little bit smaller than a DSLR meaning that in theory the low-light performance is worse, but the convenience makes a big difference. Here's a sample from my little Olympus. Taken at the Château de Pierfonds, where they film the TV show Merlin. Clicky for a bigger version, not that much bigger though as Photobucket seem to have shrunk it.



Now I'll admit that if you compare it against pro-level glass, like my old Mamiya 645 had, you'll see a difference, but if you compare it against the kit lenses that come with any DSLR, it holds up very well indeed.

Either way, it's the photographer, not the camera. We chaps often get blinded by shiny things for hobbies. Did my photography improve when I got a medium format rig? A little. Was I making the best of the kit I had before? Certainly not.

MichaelW

Ditto, keep your 40D outfit and add a carry camera.

essex-commuter

Perhaps I need to consider updating my Bronica 6x6 equipment :? 2 bodies, 4 lenses and a Metz hammerhead (are they still available??)

iPete

Damn you all, this was meant to be a money saving exercise, now I want to add a camera to the collection!

Some stuff from a few years ago, will dig out the recent stuff tomorrow..

http://www.flickr.com/photos/peterjdhair/3569287081/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/peterjdhair/3569288083/

snooks

OK here's the way forward.....

Given that your landscape work is by far the strongest, get a full frame DLSR, a good prime wangle. Go out an shoot whenever you can whne the weather is right. Shoot arty stuff when the weather is moody, shoot travel stuff when the sun shines.

Submit the pics to Alamy, sell your work, and then buy a compact

Job done :twisted:

richVSrich

wow, nice pic ipete!

i really would keep your full kit and get a decent compact for travelling..canon have some very good compacts (actual compacts, not compact dslrs)

i am so torn between camera kit and bike kit...why are my hobbies so expensive!!!! :P

iPete

arg I know, I'm just happy cycling and photography didn't come along at the same time!!

I think my main issue is the intimidation the camera causes, unless lagered up my mates shy away and I miss shots.

The Fuji X100 looks beautiful, has a hybrid VF and fast lens but its too much money for a fix lens camera!

I've started thinking that maybe a small fast/wide prime would make the camera more discrete and I'd use it more.

Problem is I sold a 28 f/1.8, 350D and 85 f/1.8 to buy the 17-55. I'm not sure if a 24 f/1.4 L, 35 f/1.4 or Sigma 30 f/1.4 would re-invigorate my general shooting after my experience with the 28 and none of them are exactly small, I'd love canon to produce a pancake prime with IS!.

UndercoverElephant

As a slight aside, anyone here heard of http://www.blipfoto.com/ ? The idea is that you take and post one photo each day, sort of like a photographic diary. The date on the exif data has to match the current day.

A couple of the guys in the office do it, and their photography is really improving a startling amount - the best way to re-invigorate your photography is to actually get out and do more, especially if you have to find something interesting on the rainy days.

Dog Breath

I'll buy your 17-55 f2.8 IS if you are looking to sell. This lens is on my wish list. Let me know if you are interested.

Cheers

DB

FoldingJoe

I have the GF-1, and like it.

I'll admit I'm not going to get the best shots out there, but it does the job that I need it for.

The 20mm pancake lens is superb, and I've added some OEM lens using adapters. Yes, they only work using manual focus, but you can get some great lens for very little money. In fact, sometimes the adapters cost more than the lenses.

The GF-3 is supposed to be very good.

Confusedboy

That's a nice shot, IPete. I usually find that sort of wispy water stuff a bit dull, but the little streams running down the beach make a stunning image; kudos to you and now I want to have a go.....

It really depends on what sort of images you want to record. As a very rough rule of thumb, the quality of the image increases proportionally to the size of the camera's image sensor, and this means it's physical size as well as it's megapixelage. A big sensor means a big heavy camera, and the biggest are found in DSLRs.

This leads to the oldest discussion in photograpgy which is about the point along the trade-off curve between lightness, convenince, and simpleness of use (point-and-shoot) or ability to allow the photographer to be artistic, creative, and record perhaps more challenging images in poor or challenging light conditions (DSLR) you are most comfortable in settling. Every time I go out with my Nikon D60 set up, which is a big bag of kit with 2 heavy lenses, spare battery, one of those little bean bags, a tripod, and all the cleaning stuff, I wish for a simple lightweight pocket camera. And every time I take a photograph I am glad I don't have one. A friend who frequently accompanies me on these expeditions uses a Panasonic Pro-sumer camera which constantly delights and amazes him with it's results and does not see the point of all the faff I get myself tangled up in.

None of which helps your dilemma, but it may put it into a sort of perspective. Of course, for real perspective one needs 3D lenses; AAAAARRRRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!!1

iPete

Like cycle touring, when your on hills you want some flats and when its flat and boring you want hills!

Its looking more and more like I'm at heading to Jessops to try a few cameras out.

The new Panasonic GF-3 + 14mm f/2.5 pancake might fit the bill, lack of hotshoe is off putting but then again I should be reaching for the 40D if I'm being that serious.

Or I could buy a Sigma 24mm f/1.8 EX DG ASHPHERICAL MACRO for the same money, should be much smaller than the 17-55 and capable in very low light not sure it really solves any issues.

I'll have post some of my recent shooting tomorrow, give a better idea.

3D lenses?! ARGGHGHHG!!1!+1!

snooks

I didn't buy a Canon to stick a Sigma lens on the front :evil:





I do have one sigma lens but Canon didn't make an equivalent lens, it's an 8mm fisheye that I use for 360º panoramic shots

Simontheintrepid

Confusedboy wrote:

That's a nice shot, IPete. I usually find that sort of wispy water stuff a bit dull, but the little streams running down the beach make a stunning image; kudos to you and now I want to have a go.....

It really depends on what sort of images you want to record. As a very rough rule of thumb, the quality of the image increases proportionally to the size of the camera's image sensor, and this means it's physical size as well as it's megapixelage. A big sensor means a big heavy camera, and the biggest are found in DSLRs.

This leads to the oldest discussion in photograpgy which is about the point along the trade-off curve between lightness, convenince, and simpleness of use (point-and-shoot) or ability to allow the photographer to be artistic, creative, and record perhaps more challenging images in poor or challenging light conditions (DSLR) you are most comfortable in settling. Every time I go out with my Nikon D60 set up, which is a big bag of kit with 2 heavy lenses, spare battery, one of those little bean bags, a tripod, and all the cleaning stuff, I wish for a simple lightweight pocket camera. And every time I take a photograph I am glad I don't have one. A friend who frequently accompanies me on these expeditions uses a Panasonic Pro-sumer camera which constantly delights and amazes him with it's results and does not see the point of all the faff I get myself tangled up in.

None of which helps your dilemma, but it may put it into a sort of perspective. Of course, for real perspective one needs 3D lenses; AAAAARRRRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!!1

+1 on both points, I don't like long exposure water shots either but its very effective on that one. Also, I find it difficult to compromise and carry everything around. It's annoying because you see so much scenery by bike but would have to wear a backpack for the camera and worry about breaking it. The good thing about a bulky SLR and full kit though is that photography becomes an activity and art in itself and develops faster than it otherwise would, at least in my opinion.

iPete - I think sooner or later you'll find a way to justify it. I spent £320 on new wheels a few months ago. Did it make me faster - no. Are they more reliable, well, yes. But do they keep me in love with my bike, hell yeah! If it adds a dimension to your photography and fills a gap, why not?

Plenty of good landscape and sport stuff on your photostream, keep it up!

Paul E

snooks wrote:

I didn't buy a Canon to stick a Sigma lens on the front :evil:





I do have one sigma lens but Canon didn't make an equivalent lens, it's an 8mm fisheye that I use for 360º panoramic shots

never tried a sigma 120-300 2.8 then, I mainly used it when I used to shoot motorsport, very sharp edge to edge, great colour and sharp end to end, that's not to say it's my favourite though

snooks

Confusedboy wrote:

A big sensor means a big heavy camera, and the biggest are found in DSLRs.

Sorry the biggest are found on Phase One backs, but they are still big and heavy

Mr Plum

Just got myself a 600D. Great camera and fantastically compact for a full SLR. Just using the kit 18-55 IS and 55-250 IS (fantastic lens for the money) at the moment. Trying to save for the 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS but bike GAS + camera GAS + guitar GAS makes Mr Plum a skint man indeed!

Roundandround

Didn't mean to sound harsh, UndercoverElephant, so apologies for that. Was trying to do the same thing as yourself, i.e. indicate that there are different tools for different jobs. Agreed, the skill is largely in the hands of the photographer, and the glass, in itself, doesn't make the shot. Your picture looks good, really good, but the blown out highlights in the far windows (sorry, now that's going to sound harsh again, and I honestly don't mean to) indicate that the exposure's a tad out. Again, that can happen with any set-up, and comes down to some skill in exposure. I suppose we all accept that there's often a trade-off between the speed of a shot and its quality (again, not all the time; there are some lucky quick breaks). It's not always about blingy new gear (after all, there's money to be spent on bikes), naturally, so I'll just echo the horses for courses thing.

iPete, maybe you've found fredmiranda.com. Brilliant website, and fantastic advice on all aspects of kit and shooting. Your picture would be right at home among the best of them there.

UndercoverElephant

Roundandround wrote:

Didn't mean to sound harsh, UndercoverElephant, so apologies for that. Was trying to do the same thing as yourself, i.e. indicate that there are different tools for different jobs. Agreed, the skill is largely in the hands of the photographer, and the glass, in itself, doesn't make the shot. Your picture looks good, really good, but the blown out highlights in the far windows (sorry, now that's going to sound harsh again, and I honestly don't mean to) indicate that the exposure's a tad out. Again, that can happen with any set-up, and comes down to some skill in exposure. I suppose we all accept that there's often a trade-off between the speed of a shot and its quality (again, not all the time; there are some lucky quick breaks). It's not always about blingy new gear (after all, there's money to be spent on bikes), naturally, so I'll just echo the horses for courses thing.

iPete, maybe you've found fredmiranda.com. Brilliant website, and fantastic advice on all aspects of kit and shooting. Your picture would be right at home among the best of them there.

Not too harsh at all, it's far from the best shot I've ever taken, so I'll happily take critique without crying, it was more to show the detail from the lens and sensor than anything else. As for the exposure, the sun was coming through that small window at the far end directly, there were already four stops between the light and dark sides of the hall, and the window was a good four stops above that. Even if you do every trick the zone system allows, sometimes you've got to say, sod it, I'll let that highlight go.

Later in the day would have been better, I suspect, but it wasn't a photography trip, it was a family holiday.

EKE_38BPM

I've always liked the idea of getting into photography, but not enough to actually get a camera of my own. The last camera I owned was a Kodak Discman (remember those?) but I have a Pentax K10D to play around with for a couple of weeks so this could either really kindle a new hobby or remove any artistic pretentions I have, for good.

As a complete novice, I am blown away by the number of buttons, settings, menus (and sub-menus) and options there are on the Pentax. Throw in the two lenses (Kenko MC Skylight [1A] 52mm and a Tamron 70-300mm 1:4-5.6) and I'm baffled. I just took the Tamron lens out of the camera case and found another doohickey I hadn't seen before.
So far I have lots of pictures of the cat. On some of them you can even see that its a cat and not just a furry blob.

I think I may have to go into a Halfords and ask some complicated questions to the bike monkey working in there to restore my sense of superiority!

Paul E

I shoot 95% of everything either personal stuff or when I get freelance stuff (rare these days) in the raw format canon has and use adobe lightroom to develop them, just gives a bit of a safety net aibeit not much with exposure and with white balance.

But I do prefer to get as much right in the camera to start with.

The amount I have in camera kit, the bike I could have got instead is a bit scary though.

iPete

I know, makes the bike stuff look cheap! Have you seen the new 200-400mm f/4L IS USM EXTENDER 1.4x? If your married that has divorce written all over it!

Paul E

If I added up all I have spent on lenses its at least £3.5k without the camera bodies, flash guns, bags, tripods and monopods etc etc