The Ideas Genie Community Forum
Photography => Equipment => Topic started by: Eric Hardy on March 15, 2009, 08:31:38 AM
-
My first camera was a box brownie, which I got in 1945. You could even make your own prints by putting the negative in a frame with the paper and leaving it in the sun!! This went everywhere with me and I used it a lot in Germany just after the war as a member of the BAOR. I was at HQ Rhine Army in Bad Oeynhausen. We had cigarette rations, which in those days, if they were not smoked, were used as currency. I used my cigarettes to get a German photographer to develop and enlarge my photos to full plate and half plate size.
I was amazed how much detail I could get, even with a box camera. I was hooked!
My first real camera was a Braun Paxette 35 mm which I got in the late 1950s
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3583/3355207093_acc13dae4d_o.gif)
This was followed by about three different versions of the Pentax Spotmatic SLR
By the mid 1970s I was taking things really seriously, built my own dark room, developed my own films and prints and even tried my hand at developing coloured prints, which was VERY time consuming. I bought myself a Mamiya twin lens reflex which gave 2 ¼ inch square negatives.
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3642/3355207159_3cd6a06261_o.jpg)
In the late 1990s came the digital revolution and I went digital! I sold all my dark room equipment and Mamiya camera (getting exactly what I paid for them twenty five years later, much to my surprise). I progressed through a couple of Olympus cameras, a couple of Fuji cameras until now I use the Canon EOS 450D DSLR. My lenses are a 12mm – 24mm Tokina wide angle zoom for church interiors, an 18mm – 55mm Canon lens for general use, a 55mm – 250mm Canon lens for telephotos and a 50mm Canon prime lens. (You have to multiply by 1.6 to get their 35 mm equivalents).
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3424/3356087404_58d0da0c8b_o.jpg)
I am keen on photographing churches and a little group of us get together to visit and record them. In fact we are getting together tomorrow to visit three churches in Oxfordshire.
Here is a picture of me in action taken by a fellow enthusiast!
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2384/2357284793_ae33178aef.jpg)
I have had no formal training whatsoever but I have learned a lot from experience and reading round the subject.
In the end, it just boils down to getting a lot of enjoyment from an interesting hobby.
Eric H
-
A very fascinating and detailed piece of your photographic history there Eric - thank you for sharing it with us.
Our older cameras certainly bring back some memories don't they. :D
.......... I used it a lot in Germany just after the war as a member of the BAOR. I was at HQ Rhine Army in Bad Oeynhausen.
Small world Eric. Kathy used to live in Bad Oeynhausen around 1967. Her dad was in the Army (Royal Signals), stationed at BFPO Herford.
Have a great time in Oxfordshire. ;D
Laurie.
I've moved the thread from this point onwards to http://www.flowergenie.co.uk/ideas/forum/index.php/topic,986.0.html (http://www.flowergenie.co.uk/ideas/forum/index.php/topic,986.0.html) as it has moved off topic slightly and doesn't detract from this current thread.
Laurie.
-
I am a church afficionado too, Eric. Especially the oldest Roman churches in Burgundy. I understand what you mean by learning by experiment: a lot of trial and sometimes (often? :) ) error. My camera is a very compact Panasonic DMC-TZ2: it's rather basic, but all I need at the moment.
-
I have just been overcome by lens lust ::) !!!
I read a review of the Tokina 100 mm macro lens and this sold it for me "Regardless of the great optical performance of this macro lens, technical proficiency is a prerequisite for sharp images at high magnification. I made over 250 images with the Tokina AT-X 100mm f/2.8 PRO D and feel it is suitable for both serious nature photography and as a conventional short telephoto. This multi-platform lens is a very fine performer. Quite affordable for a 100mm macro with the latest multilayered coating technology, it offers exceptional value."
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3568/3428072407_410ceb4166.jpg)
I have ordered one from Amazon and just can't wait for it to arrive :D
I have the Tokina 12 mm - 24 mm lens and I know what that can do. Here is one of Fingest Church, near us, taken with it two days ago
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3652/3425338419_07f3bf12a7.jpg)
I will be shooting bugs and flowers like mad.
Eric H
-
Nice one Eric - "boys and their toys" ::) :D
It's great to hear you still get a buzz of excitement for new equipment.
Waiting expectantly for it to arrive for you, and then seeing your 'super close-up' shots.
Laurie.
-
Boys have toys but men use tools :)
Even at my age Anthea puts up with me and my toys with mild amusement.
Eric H
-
I am a church afficionado too, Eric. Especially the oldest Roman churches in Burgundy.
I am sorry Andre, I have just noticed your post that I never replied to. There are some magnificent Romanesque churches in Burgundy which I would love to photograph. I am afraid that these days I have to content myself with churches a bit nearer to home.
Eric H
-
RE:
I will be shooting bugs and flowers like mad
You have my attention ;) :)
-
My new lens arrived yesterday. I feel like a boy with a new toy ;D
I have been shooting off a few experimental shots. I think I will need practice, it isn't always easy to get perfect focus when handheld but a few give an idea of what should be possible. I will have to try it with a tripod sometime.
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3395/3443431573_54c796e317.jpg)
Blackthorn
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3301/3443412517_4ed53cf291.jpg)
Viburnum Burkwoodii
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3383/3444220218_ebd3fdb8c8.jpg)
Magnolia x soulangiana
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3657/3443400875_bda5095c14.jpg)
Hellbore
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3299/3444216618_21a8251802.jpg)
Bee on Grape Hyacinth
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3401/3443398007_f22a3138a7.jpg)
Magnolia Stellata
Eric H
-
Excellent images Eric.
I particularly like the first one, the anthers show well.
Malcolm
-
Absolutely stunning quality.
Nice to see names to the plants, Eric. I'm looking forward to more and more :)
I love all those plants.
Did you have a sniff at the M. stellata? Some have a very faint but very beautiful scent.
-
Thank you Malcolm, I had as many misses as hits so I will have to keep practising.
Eric H
-
Absolutely stunning quality.
Nice to see names to the plants, Eric. I'm looking forward to more and more :)
I love all those plants.
Thank you George, I am beginning to like this lens. Here are a few more from today: -
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3305/3444270705_820e56a4f5.jpg)
Our black cherry is in bloom
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3582/3445086056_bd6b2e968c.jpg)
and so is our Victoria Plum.
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3313/3445178584_09a947f127.jpg)
This Japonica Chaenomeles(?) has been in bloom for ages
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3593/3443972369_9855a3ebc6.jpg)
The snakes head fritillaries are going over but one or two are still in flower
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3338/3443977475_f30b89e14e.jpg)
Someone please remind me of the name of this one.
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3639/3443957259_006b915d40.jpg)
Scilla siberica
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3312/3444786764_a6853fcdae_b.jpg)
Finally a little bit larger so that you can see the little fly :)
The daffs are still going strong.
Did you have a sniff at the M. stellata? Some have a very faint but very beautiful scent.
Our M.stellata has a lovely but delicate scent. At the moment there is a heavy scent pervading the garden so you have to put your nose very close to appreciate its subtlety.
Eric H
-
Sheer quality
White flowers are one of the most difficult to capture. Youve excelled with those examples.
That Black Cherry is just tres beau!
The next difficult colour?
Well, I'd say purple and blue.
Youve done very well with Scilla siberica.
Comparing to the real thing, is the colour true?
RE: Someone please remind me of the name of this one.
I'd say Dicentra spectabilis.
Could be a cultivar of course.
That was taken today? Mine is nowhere near flowering stage yet!
RE: Our M.stellata has a lovely but delicate scent.
That describes that plant perfectly. Gorgeous. My best scented one died a few years ago. I now have 2 replacements but I dont think their scent is as good.
-
Thank you George.
Youve done very well with Scilla siberica.
Comparing to the real thing, is the colour true?
You have made me go out in the garden and look very closely at the colour. It was not quite true although the difference is quite subtle.
I have adjusted it in Adobe Elements 5 to as an exact a colour as I can manage. It looks much truer now: -
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3574/3447142234_e76dd2105e.jpg)
I'd say Dicentra spectabilis. Could be a cultivar of course. That was taken today? Mine is nowhere near flowering stage yet!
Thank you for that name. I have looked it up in the RHS A-Z and it does not show an illustration of D. spectabilis. The leaves in D. Stuart Boothman, which is illustrated, look very similar. The one in my picture of is in the herbaceous border and in full sunlight. It just about clings on. We have another large clump on the north side of a holly hedge and under an apple tree. This is thriving and, along with some ferns, really seems to like the damp and the shade.
Eric H
-
Which brings me to a REAL big problem I have in my Master Database.
Putting a description to the colour of each plant.
Have you noticed that many websites avoid stating the colour of a plant?
The reason being, I suppose, you are looking at an image (but not always!) and you dont need a description!
Nice touch up job, Eric 8)
-
Colour, like the flavour of wine, is almost impossible to describe accurately ;)
Our bible does try :)
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3541/3447888378_9b58d048d9.jpg)
Eric H
-
Colour on monitor displays can be quite different too, they should be calibrated, I dont.
Malcolm
-
The monitors are very good nowadays. If the image looks like the plant Ive photographed, I'm happy with my image file.
Laurie has a topic somewhere n this forum where he explained how to calibrate.
Hey Eric. Thats the good book I use, and those spectacles look remarkably like mine!
-
A great selection of photos you've posted up to now Eric.
Very good composition and detail. Well done!
The monitors are very good nowadays. If the image looks like the plant Ive photographed, I'm happy with my image file.
Laurie has a topic somewhere n this forum where he explained how to calibrate.
This is the topic link where Monitor Calibration (http://www.flowergenie.co.uk/ideas/forum/index.php/topic,599.msg2620.html#msg2620) was discussed if anyone is interested.
Laurie.
-
Colour on monitor displays can be quite different too, they should be calibrated, I dont.
So I understand, Malcolm. I don't calibrate mine either. I am happy with my monitor as it is so I daren't fiddle in case I can't get it back again
Hey Eric. Thats the good book I use, and those spectacles look remarkably like mine!
I was pretty certain that you would have the bible George :)
Thank you for your kind comments Laurie and also for the link to your explanation of Monitor calibration. You probably read what I said to Malcolm about not wanting to fiddle. Being keen on photography I made certain that my computer has a decent monitor and bought a Sony x-black LCD which is excellent. The screen on my laptop is a decent one too. I have had pictures up on both of them at the same time and I don't detect any colour variation so I take that as a good sign.
Reading your post on monitor calibration I noticed you mentioning to George the use of Shadows/Highlights in Adobe Elements. That is a very useful tool which I use a lot on church interiors. It is very difficult to get both the windows and interior properly exposed because of the glare so I deliberately underexpose the interior so that the windows are correctly exposed and I lighten the interior with this tool. It is useful on white flowers too although I didn't need use it on my recent posts.
Eric H
-
I agree completely Eric about not fiddling with your monitor settings unnecessarily.
It's when you detect a significant change of colour of an object you've photographed compared to how your monitor shows it - then a bit of calibration would be required.
As I mentioned in that article, I'm still using a CRT monitor which is quite a few years old now. It hasn't got to the stage where much calibration is needed yet though, as it's still giving accurate colour rendition.
I don't believe in updated my technology to the latest versions just for the sake of it either. As long as it's performing correctly for me I'm happy with it.
When my CRT monitor eventually fails then I'll get one of the LCD models. Better quality and much smaller footprint on your desktop.
Laurie.
-
I remember, ages ago, Laurie saying ?boys and their toys?, but never mind ? here goes :D.
In October I succumbed and bought a Canon 40D body (second hand) to supplement my Canon 450D. Of course my existing lenses were compatible. It was at a price I couldn?t resist. I bought it from a chap who has bought himself a Nikon D700 (full frame). It cost him a packet. Why he changed I don't know because he can't use his Canon lenses on it. I don't know why he had the Canon really. He has only taken 6000 shots in the time he has had it. It is in mint condition. I excused my self indulgence because it was around the time of my birthday.
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5287/5321919412_06b066500b_o.jpg)
Canon 40D
Then of course the lens lust returns ;) so Anthea allowed me to treat myself to a new lens as a (very early) Christmas present. I got the Canon EF 24-105/4L IS USM. It is a good performer.
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5090/5321318503_eea9eb5906_z.jpg)
I have been very pleased with results so far. On my two last church crawls I have had this lens on the 40D and my Tokina 12?24mm on the 450D and that has been all I needed. No lens changing.
Here are one or two examples. All are taken hand held and Aperture Priority
I know there are a few Nikon enthusiasts among you so here is my daughter-in-law, Tabitha on Boxing Day: -
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5206/5296781155_3f001b0503_z.jpg)
1/100 sec; f4; ISO 100; 105mm focal length; Exposure bias ?1/3 EV
And of course I couldn?t resist taking lots of my great grandson Zack so here a couple of samples: -
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5209/5296455857_c387d7f771_z.jpg)
1/800 sec; f4; ISO 500; 40mm focal length; Exposure bias 0 EV
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5242/5296429617_d9b98520ac_z.jpg)
1/132 sec; f4; ISO 100; 40mm focal length; Exposure bias ?1/3 EV
And one or two from a recent trip to Oxford: -
Lincoln College Library
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5049/5257800163_a73cc37fb2_z.jpg)
1/25 sec; f6.3; ISO 400; 55mm focal length; Exposure bias ?1/3 EV. This demonstates the effectiveness of IS (image stabilisation)
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5121/5258411530_33658a4de1_z.jpg)
1/25 sec; f6.3; ISO 1600; 35mm focal length; Exposure bias ?1/3 EV.
And finally an exterior shot of the Clarendon Building (taken to avoid showing the traffic below)
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5286/5260286151_5592c5e987_z.jpg)
1/400 sec; f7.1; ISO 200; 80mm focal length; Exposure bias ?1/3 EV.
And here is a 100% crop
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5005/5323541122_20497f485a_z.jpg)
-
Eric, you must have been reading my mind.
I was only looking at this topic yesterday evening as I've been thinking about purchasing a Canon DSLR. I knew you had one, plus a couple of other members on the Forum, so I was just checking which one you had.
Just saw you do this posting today with a new Canon camera you've added to your photographic arsenal. 8)
You're making me envious. ;D
As you know I use a Nikon D60 DSLR and have generally been very pleased with the results. However, the area I'm not very impressed with is it's landscape capabilities. Sometimes they're not very sharp and other times there's some slight distortion of perspective for the part of the scene closest to the camera. I've read some good reviews about the Canon range of DSLRs which has prompted me to head away from Nikon this time around. ;)
I would be very interested to hear your assessment of your latest acquisition in all areas - close-ups, general scenes, portraits and of course, landscapes.
I'm expecting to receive compensation for the accident in October 2010 fairly soon, so I thought I might treat myself.
Another great set of photos too Eric. :)
Laurie.
-
Hi Laurie,
Serious amateur photographers, in the main, seem to divide themselves into Nikon or Canon people. I am a Canon person. Although two of my children (and families) are serious Nikon users, my eldest is a Canon person, so he will inherit my equipment ;D
What I would suggest is that you join Flickr, if you are not a member already. You don’t have to put up photos and unless, like me, you want to upload vast quantities, it costs nothing. Even I get my “Pro” membership free because I use BT Yahoo for my broadband.
You can find my Flickr site by Googling “Eric Hardy Flickr”. If you can then make me a contact I will reciprocate by making you a contact and “friend”. That way you will see more of my photos than the general public can see.
If you click on a photo in my photostream it will open up again and you will see noted what camera has been used. If you click on “Actions” you can view different sizes and also view Exif info.
Down the side of the first page of my photostream you will see “Collections” which in turn contain “sets”. “Countryside and seaside” contains a set called “The Chilterns” you will see there are square thumbnails in the right. About the bottom 20 rows have been taken with Canon cameras.
To save time, here is a link http://www.flickr.com/photos/erichardyuk/sets/72057594077093904/
Of course you can explore it more. There are groups that I belong to that you may be interested in : -
http://www.flickr.com/groups/digitalrebelxsi450d/
http://www.flickr.com/groups/40d/
http://www.flickr.com/groups/canon24-105/
If you do a lot of browsing it may help you to come to a decision.
Unless you are wanting to do videos, there is not much point in getting the later and more expensive models. They also have a higher pixel count and I read somewhere that they demand higher quality lenses to get the best results.
You mentioned distortion in landscapes. I take my pictures in RAW. A programme called DPP comes with Canon cameras and is a RAW converter. It includes a tool which corrects any distortion from a Canon lens (it doesn’t work with my Tokina lenses).
I hope this helps and I will be interested to know how you get on.
All the best,
Eric
-
Laurie, a PS. I don't know if you are aware of the DPReview site: -
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d/
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos450d/
-
Thanks for all that info Eric. I'll look into Flickr a bit later on when I've got more time. 8)
I have used that dpreview.com site before I purchased my first Nikon camera and find their reviews to be very detailed, unbiased and extremely helpful.
I haven't been to the site for reviews on Canon cameras as yet, just wanted to get a feel for them through members who use them first.
Laurie.
-
After much deliberation Eric I've decided to stick with my Nikon.
The problem I mentioned about the distortion on the landscape setting was entirely down to me. The standard lens on the camera is a 28-55mm and I'd focused down to the minimum 28mm, which of course was giving me a wide-angle effect. Schoolboy error, I don't know what I'd been thinking about or why I hadn't twigged earlier ::) :-[
Anyway, that 'issue' now sorted I've invested in a longed-for telephoto lens, and picked up a real bargain on a Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-300mm F4.5-5.6 Vibration Reduction lens.
I haven't had time to put it through its paces yet, but it will suit my needs and I have no doubts of its performance capabilities.
Below is a photo of said lens:
(http://www.pixiemouse.com/igforum/nikondx2.jpg)
Just wanted to keep you updated there Eric. ;)
Laurie.
-
Well done Laurie. I think Canons and Nikon cameras are both superb so why change once you have chosen the route to take? I have just checked up the customers reviews of your new lens on Amazon. Nine gave the lens a glowing 5 stars, one a good review but 4 stars and one a miserable 1 star. Either he had a dud or was extremely fussy and expecting the performance of a lens 5 times the price ::)
The problem I mentioned about the distortion on the landscape setting was entirely down to me. The standard lens on the camera is a 28-55mm and I'd focused down to the minimum 28mm, which of course was giving me a wide-angle effect.
I don't know whether you take your pictures in RAW. I do and use the software that comes with the Canon Cameras to convert to JPEGs. One useful feature is the software detects what lens you have used and will correct any slight distortion. I don't know whether Nikon have something similar. I believe some Adobe Photoshop programmes have this facilty and most lenses of whatever make are covered.
A lot of my shots are wide angle, of course, because I take a lot of church interiors. My Tokina 12 - 24 mm lens gets a lot of use (about 19 - 38 mm in 35 mm terms) This shows what 12 mm can cover (Gloucester Cathedral, April 2011)
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5021/5684475601_0798f57843_z.jpg)
Anyway, in the end it is best to forget what kit you have and just enjoy photography. I am sure you will get a lot of pleasure from your new lens and I look forward to seeing some results.
-
Thanks for that Eric.
My Nikon does have the capability to shoot in RAW mode, I've just never used it. I've been satisfied with the results I get shooting in JPEG mode and manually adjusting any settings to suit a particular occasion if it's required. Having said that though, I predominantly use the auto settings for the majority of my photo shoots and I am happy with the results I get.
Previously being a freelance photographer, I don't do commission work anymore, so I don't need the discerning results that my clients expected. When you're being paid for your work then that demands absolute perfection.
Still, the camera can do only so much and I know the majority of professional photographers use post-production techniques with software such as PhotoShop to finalise their digital photos.
Some people say it's cheating, especially when you do glamour or fashion photography (which I used to do), but as long as you don't overdo the 'tweaking' then the results are more complimentary than beautifying your model out of all recognition.
After all, your model could have had a nasty spot or blemish that hasn't quite healed over and makeup couldn't fully disguise. Then they appreciate the photographers sensitivity in using their skills to do what they couldn't on the day of the shoot.
Nowadays I just shoot for my own pleasure (not that it wasn't a pleasure before though :D ), but I'm not getting paid for my work and I don't have that extra pressure that went with it.
Laurie.
-
George asked me to explain an articulated screen. I thought the easiest thing was to photograph it. Here is the new camera from the front.
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7214/7345243418_633a363575.jpg)
Here it is from the back with the screen closed. I take most shots through the viewfinder so kept this way it protects it and stops it getting smeared from my cheek.
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8156/7160034711_1ec98535f7.jpg)
Here it is with the screen put in the traditional position
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8015/7160035051_bfbb9324a1.jpg)
You can set it at an angle
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7240/7345243822_bf3070c0fd.jpg)
And you can point it at yourself and see the screen from the front
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7089/7160035149_07c80be7bd.jpg)
As I said before - old boy with new toy! ::)
-
EricH:
I’m directing this Forum posting to you, but I hope other members of the Forum will join in. I have been interested in the Canon 60D ever since I first saw it advertised in the Seattle WA USA area.
The camera I’m using now is a Kodak V570, I purchased it originally to use in my interest of revitalizing Main Street Downtowns. My work consisted of recording revitalizing efforts in other downtown cities with the camera, and to bring those photos back for others to view that were interested in the same subject. The Kodak served its purpose well.
Since my retirement my interests have turned to both gardening and hiking the many, many trails in the Pacific Northwest of the USA. The Kodak is ideal for the hiking, it is very compact (the size of a deck of playing cards), and has given us some beautiful photos. I tuck it into a small shoulder bag, which leaves my hands free for ‘hanging on’. George has seen a few of the pics of the alpine gardens of Mt. Rainier. A beautiful day in August, several years ago, we hiked to the approximate 6,000 foot level. It was right at the peak for the beauty of the mountain, and I stood at awe and amazement at what I saw. I beautiful clear blue sky, the flowers at their peak, but we had an abrupt change of weather, and when that happens you get off the mountain.
Back to the 60D camera, the first articulating view finder that I had ever seen, was several years ago, and could be attached to my V570. I was trying to figure out how to take a ground view photo of the blossoms on my tuberous begonias, but lying on my stomach didn’t prove too successful. The product was called ‘flipxbac’, made in China, marketed Canada. Its advertising illustrated several uses; laying the camera on the ground, holding it above your head, and shooting behind one-self. But, it was all done with mirrors. Since I’ve worn bifocals most of my life, trying to make sure the camera was targeted and focused where I wanted it was difficult. I never did install the gadget.
But, I’m still interested in the articulating view finder idea, have you found where the feature is a benefit to you when you take your garden photos. I know very little about taking photos, working with lenses, etc. Since I’m using Genie Pro, I’ll take the clue from George, and use his terminology about either linking my photos to ‘gardens’ or to ‘plants’. That is what I want the Canon 60D for. In using Amazon as a research tool, they list the fact that the 60D in available with two different lenses, I was thinking of buying the camera body with one of the lenses, and buying the other of the lenses separately. Do I need to do that? What lenses do you suggest?
By the way, I read the other day from some ‘expert’ that gardening photography is all about ‘tripods and shutter cables’, do you agree?
Here is something you and the other members might also be interested in, my Issue 184 of Gardens Illustrated magazine, on page 99, showed the winners of International Garden Photographer of the Year, and provided this link. http://www.igpoty.com/competition05/winners_thebeautyofplants.asp?parent=winners
- Toby
-
Hello Toby,
I had never heard of a Kodak v570 camera until you mentioned it in your post. I have just looked it up in “Digital Photography Review” and am amazed; I haven’t seen a digital camera like it, with its dual lenses. The 23mm wide angle one should be very useful. It most certainly sounds an ideal camera to take on your hiking. You certainly wouldn’t be taking the Canon 60D in your pocket, it is a heavy beast. I have just put the camera body on the kitchen scales and it weighed just over 1lb 10oz. With my favourite lens attached it weighed 3lbs 6oz! Having said that, it is lighter than my Canon 40D.
The 60D is very much a new toy so I haven’t put the screen through its paces. I take many photos of old churches and cathedrals. Sometimes I put the camera on the floor with the self timer on to photograph a vault and it is very much hit and miss at the moment. The articulated screen will be great for that. Here is an example taken in Gloucester Cathedral
(http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5107/5685043968_ccebc718e7_z.jpg)
I had an old Fuji 9500 which was a nice camera with a tilting screen. I managed some upward looking shots at flowers with that and when the weather gets nicer I will try some more.
Of course the trouble with DSLRs is the need for lenses and I find I am inclined to collect them. I have two prime lenses – 50mm and 100mm; a wide angle zoom 12mm – 24mm, my favourite zoom, 24 – 105mm and a telephoto 55mm – 250mm. You would need a backpack and strong shoulders to lug that lot around on your hikes.
I have a photographer friend who has all the paraphernalia, just as I have, but who has bought himself a Canon G12 with which he gets excellent results. It has an articulated 2.8 inch screen, 10 megapixels and a 5x zoom. It has all the manual controls. It seems to be a popular camera with keen photographers who have all the kit but don’t always want to lug it around. It also has the advantage of being half the price of a 60D and there are no expensive lenses to buy. You might care to look it up on Amazon and read the reviews.
By the way, I read the other day from some ‘expert’ that gardening photography is all about ‘tripods and shutter cables’, do you agree?
For the perfect macro shot, that is probably true, but for 99% of my shots I just set the ISO high enough to get the shutter speed fast enough and go from there.
Thank you for the link to the International Garden Photographer of the Year site. I think they probably did use tripods and shutter cables. There are some lovely photos there.
I will finish with a few shots I took the day before yesterday, trying out the camera in the garden in between heavy showers. I used my 100mm lens, ISO set at 250 and aperture set at f6.3. I was trying to see if I could capture raindrops.
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7088/7348480814_4526d811b6_c.jpg)
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8150/7163258955_d2aacd1e5e_c.jpg)
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7215/7163007909_f7bd524f1c_c.jpg)
I hope this is of some help
Eric
-
EricH:
I want to thank you for doing me a big favor. You helped me make a decision, and I think that it is a good one. I’m going to stick with using my Kodak v570. I thought that I needed all those ‘new’ things to improve my photography, but first I better understand the camera I now have. I’ll follow Laurie’s advice: “Practice, practice, and practice some more”
Kodak, by the way, is out of business. Very sad, that the leading company in photography here in the USA, no longer exists. They made the first personal motion picture camera, my older brother had one, black and white, and my 35mm color slide camera was their manufacture, even the projectors that were used with them. Was not Technicolor also their invention?
I like my Kodak very much, I like the way it transfers images to my computer with just the push of one button from its loading dock. So, out will come the instruction book for a good read, and there is lots of online help still available from Kodak.
I can do macro with it, based on the camera being approximately 18” inches away from the subject.
I have a beautiful (just lucky) photo that I took, that I’m using as wallpaper on my desktop. It’s of a rhododendron that was given to my mother, from my older brother, as a Mothers’ Day gift. It’s a gorgeous dusty-rose color. It is still in my (her) garden where she planted it. When I turn my computer on and see the image, it brings back many memories! Some sad, some happy! Both of them are gone, now.
Again, Eric, thanks!
If anyone would like to give me instructions about posting my photos to the Forum, I might work up enough courage to do so. Is there any written word about how to do it? I have looked all over the Forum site, but can’t find anything of help there. There is some recent information regarding re-sizing, but I mean about lay-out and captions, etc, to make a good (?) presentation
- Toby
-
If anyone would like to give me instructions about posting my photos to the Forum, I might work up enough courage to do so. Is there any written word about how to do it? I have looked all over the Forum site, but can’t find anything of help there. There is some recent information regarding re-sizing, but I mean about lay-out and captions, etc, to make a good (?) presentation
- Toby
I prepared an article on just that subject Toby back in February 2012. Read about it here (http://www.flowergenie.co.uk/ideas/forum/index.php/topic,1692.0.html).
Laurie.
-
EricH:
You helped me make a decision, and I think that it is a good one. I’m going to stick with using my Kodak v570.
I am glad if my reply helped you come to a decision, Toby. If you are happy with your Kodak, why change? It is the person behind the viewfinder that creates the picture, the camera is only a means to the end. I have seen some beautiful photos taken with a Box Brownie.
I was going to suggest that Laurie could probably help you on your question about posting photos and I see that he has done so already.
Eric
-
Laurie, EricH:
How did I miss that posting, Laurie? Just exactly what I wanted, now to see if I can do it!
That posting was quickly printed, and takes the first page position in my “How To –“ 3-ring loose-leaf binder.
George is right! Computers came very late into my life. When I was operating my retail business, I had computers, but hired employees to operate them. I just read the printed out reports. Everything I have learned about computers, George has taught me! What a guy!!
The first thing I did after I retired was convert an extra bedroom into an office and bought a new computer. After reading about Genie Software in the gardening section of my newspaper, I contacted the US representative that George had at that time, and the next thing I knew George was emailing me. Oh, what a time he has had with me since, but we’ve made it together this far. He hasn’t told me to ‘go home and stay home’ yet! Maybe this time?
So gentlemen, thank you for these words of wisdom about cameras and posting to the Forum. It has been very much appreciated.
-Toby
P.S. It has been raining quite a bit here, so I’ve been having fun at my computer. Today, I have discovered GA005 Garden Photos in the GeniePro software, and worked my self towards using the Co-ordinates with a Garden photo. I understand that is what was the ‘WOW’ thing at the Pacific Northwest. Flower Show when George displayed his software there, several years ago. For those that haven’t used it yet, check it out!
-
How did I miss that posting, Laurie? Just exactly what I wanted, now to see if I can do it!
Glad to help Toby - that's what we're here to do.
Because we have so many different sections on the Forum, covering a wide variety of topics, it's not always easy to find the information you want.
Ask the right question (which is what you did Toby) and an answer pops right up ;)
Looking forward to seeing your photos.
Laurie.
P.S. Thank you Eric for posting your expert knowledge on cameras to help out Toby 8)
-
I'm reading this with a big wide smile and a giggle here and there.
I'm very proud of your achievements Toby. Its easy to understand why. You don't shy away from a challenge and when you decide you want to do something, you do your research on the subject (with a little support here and there :)) and persist with great energy and determination until you succeed.
My biggest smile is something to do with satisfaction and admiration. It took a little encouragement - now its great to see you jumping the final hurdle and engaging in the very useful topics on the forum.
Once you get to posting photos (you'll soon manage that!) I look forward to you sharing your wide experience in gardening and your love of nature, and sharing our many behind the scenes and interesting communications with our forum members.
-
George, Laurie, Eric and Others Watching this discussion:
With my Kodak camera I use Kodak Easyshare Software. From Easyshare’s instruction material, comes the following. Would I be better off using any or all of the following instructions from Kodak? Or should I discard these, and stick strictly to George’s procedure.
Rename and Save Picture
If you want to save a picture in a new way (new name, size, file format, or location)—and keep the original picture unchanged—use Save As.
1. In My Collection, right-click the picture and select Save As.
2. Do the following.
From Save in, select the location on your hard disk where you want to save the picture.
In Filename, type a filename (default—current filename).
From Save as type, select a picture file format , or type an alternate file extension (JPEG—JPG and JPE; TIFF—TIF).
Selecting JPEG balances both picture file size and quality, resulting in a good picture quality.
From Resize picture, select the size. Options are:
Percent of original size 75%, 50%, and 25%
Full Size Saves the picture in its original size.
Best for Email Reduces the longest dimension to 1024 pixels.
Best for Web Reduces the longest dimension to 400 pixels.
Thumbnail Reduces the longest dimension to 96 pixels.
3. Click Save.
Save Picture as New Size
1. In My Collection, right-click the picture and select Save As.
2. From Resize picture, select a size. Options are:
Percent of original size 75%, 50%, and 25%
Full Size Saves the picture in its original size.
Best for Email Reduces the longest dimension to 1024 pixels.
Best for Web Reduces the longest dimension to 400 pixels.
Thumbnail Reduces the longest dimension to 96 pixels.
3. To save a new version of the picture, click Save. The original picture is not replaced.
Copy Pictures from EasyShare Software
Copy pictures/videos from EasyShare software to removable media (a memory card or USB device that's connected to your computer), or to any location on your hard disk. Just click the Copy To icon in the taskbar.
1. In My Collection, add the pictures to the Picture tray .
2. Click the Copy To icon in the taskbar. Or, choose File Copy To.
3. Click the tab for the destination you're copying to:
Removable Media (click for steps 4 - 6)
My Computer (click for steps 4 - 6)
(TOBY--If I click on ‘My Computer’ for steps 4 – 6, I get this
My Computer—copy to any location on your hard disk.
4. Navigate to the location your’re copyng to.
5. Optionally, click ‘Make New Folder‘ to create a new folder for your copied pictures.
6. Click OK.
Thanks!
-Toby
-
Do whatever you find easiest to begin with Toby.
In those Kodak instructions, the Best for Web sizes would be perfect for posting on the forum.
-
I am sure there are several possible ways of uploading your pictures to the forum, Toby. I post many of my photos on Flickr and there you have a label "Share" next to each photo. When I click on that I can copy the information you put between img [in square brackets] and /img [in square brackets] at the size I choose and paste it into the draft of the message. Hey Presto :) the image appears. It isn't difficult because they give the information between img [in square brackets] and /img [in square brackets]. I have discovered that if I retitle the image in Flickr afterwards the photo disappears from the forum so I have to be careful. You may wonder why I typed it like this, but when I typed img [in square brackets] and /img [in square brackets] in its proper format it just didn't appear in the message because there was no code for a picture in between. This is the only method I have used to post pictures so I am not much help in advising on other methods.
Eric
-
George, what’s this about a ‘big wide smile and a giggle here and there’?
Especially the ‘giggle’ part. Did I say something funny? I don’t ever recollect doing that to you! Funny, never! I’m a serious guy!
While I appreciate your invitation to share my wide experience (that’s certainly debatable) about gardening and love of nature, I’ll have to deny your request at this time. As the lonesome gardener at my house, I have to take advantage of all the sunshine I can get
If I can take a rain-check (pun intended) on this invitation until my down-time during November, December, January of the year, I would be happy to see what I could do with the challenge. You are right when you say there are many useful topics on the forum. But we can talk about all of this via private correspondence, and maybe make up a plan of some kind to accomplish some goals.
Back to the subject of “Posting Photos to the Forum”.
Yesterday we had the most beautiful weather so far for this year! Guess, where I was at? In front of my computer trying to do the procedure to copy a photo from Kodak EasyShare to my computer, resize it, and follow Laurie’s article on posting a photo to the Forum. I think I’m doing it correctly. I know where the resized photo is on my computer. I can open it, and it looks okay. It is 400 x 300, jpeg, 69.2 KB. I am able to BROWSE, locate the folder on my computer and the path fills the ATTACH area.
Three times I did the procedure, but every time I get to the point of PREVIEW, and click on it, nothing happens.
I certainly appreciate Laurie’s article, but if he doesn’t mind, I need some help as to what happens after clicking on PREVIEW. The text area’s border blinks red, and the text that I entered remains. Am I to see the photo and the entire posting for a final check, before I click on POST?
I also realize I’m a ‘johnny-come-lately’ to the computer world, and any 6-year old child can do this now-a-days. I’m afraid my ignorance is showing. By ignorance, I mean that I have never been exposed to this material before.
-Toby
-
I certainly appreciate Laurie’s article, but if he doesn’t mind, I need some help as to what happens after clicking on PREVIEW. The text area’s border blinks red, and the text that I entered remains. Am I to see the photo and the entire posting for a final check, before I click on POST?
-Toby
To be perfectly honest Toby, I don't use the 'attachments' option for uploading photos. The method I described was taken from what George mentioned in a different topic to someone else who had posed this question a while ago.
To actually test this method I did a test posting and 'attached' one of my photos. Using the Preview button DOES NOT show the photo prior to posting. It only appears once you've pressed the POST button.
I was surprised at first, but then thinking about it it appeared to make sense. Until you press the POST button your photo is not sent up to George's server space so it's not visible on your draft posting until then. So all you get is a blank space where your photo will eventually appear.
However, it does make formatting your text around a photo a bit more difficult when you can't see the full layout in 'preview' mode.
Don't let this put you off though Toby. Maybe George will look in on this and clarify the process, or any other members who use the 'attachments' method of uploading their photos in their postings.
I may have to amend the mini-tutorial for doing this if that's the case :-[
Laurie.
-
Laurie:
Now I can stop thinking I’m going loony and turning into a basket-case.
As you say, if I haven’t posted to the Forum yet, the photo is not going to show up in PREVIEW.
But, I do not want to post to the Forum, until I can see the whole posting. To me, if would be terribly embarrassing to link the wrong PHOTO to the wrong TOPIC.
If you should make a change to your original article, may I suggest that when you do that, you mention the fact that George has a wonderful ‘How To’ on the Genie Website complete with Screenshots about working with Files and Folders. I’ll let you check out the location, and advise the viewers. It has helped me tremendously; it seems I refer to it constantly, especially when I’m doing those necessary Genie BACKUPS.
We’ll let George take over from here, when he can get to it! He’s a busy gentleman!
Thank you,
- Toby
-
I've amended the instructions for uploading photos to the Forum, and added the link to George's How to's section at the suggestion of Toby.
The link is in my original posting, but here it is for quickness - George's How to's (http://www.ideasforgardens.com/GuideToFolders/index.htm).
Laurie.
-
Apologies for not responding folk. My ex-dayjob colleagues meet up once a month in a pub in Belfast for a chinwag - last night was the June meeting.
I use the Spellchecker, but never the Preview Toby.
My recommendations are to go ahead and post. Then, View what you've posted.
If it isn't quite right, then click the Modify button and make corrections.
Hack away until its OK. If you still cant get the correct photo to show, edit and ask us to have a look.
We've all made mistakes posting photos :-[ so don't get up tight about it. You are among friends here :)