DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... The Camera/Picture Taking Thread

I love photographing my dog. ][/url]
][/url]

I ate some muktuk, and that's basically just whale fat. It doesn't take like much, but it's sorta salty?

One of my links bit the dust so here it is again.



And some more fun with HDR.

I fish for Steelhead on the Sandy River in the early spring. It's a 5 hour float in my buddy's drift boat. Some days the fishing is good. Others it can be very slow. One slow day we pulled the boat over to fish a hole from the bank for awhile. Someone had stopped before us and left behind hundreds of cairns. Hundreds! Some only two or three small stones high. Others much taller. They spanned a huge area of river rock covered beach. It was quite impressive.


][/url]

Years ago, My Hunny and I were doing a 70-mile backpacking loop in Canada. We'd reached the rockiest, most demanding leg of the trip, and that day's hike was a long, hot (exhausting) slog. Navigation was by cairn, because there was no soil to show a visible foot trail. We'd missed a couple cairns along the way, and had to drop pack and scout about to re-find the trail. My mood was decidedly salty by then.

We crested a hilltop and found the next cairn: a perfect, 3-ft tall replica of Stonehenge. My first thought was of that scene in Spinal Tap... and I lost it completely. My Wife had never seen the movie, so she only got half the joke. Me? 100% full-frontal.

It was just the pick-me-up I needed... and at just the right time.

Thanks for the memory, Dawg!


p.s. This is a view from the South. The cairn was on the ridge waaay in the background, right at about that sunlit spot- just left of center.

Link to see it a bit larger.


Oklahoma, it seems that some people, probably from that stupid musical, think that Oklahoma is nothing but prairie grass and barbed wire. In the central and west part of the state that's fairly accurate just don't forget to add in the red dirt. But it's not true everywhere.

Welcome to eastern Oklahoma.

J/C

Glad to see all these photos coming up on a year of this thread existing. They push me to up my photo game!
------------------------------------------
Getting a little bit of landscape fatigue, well of shooting the same things, up here in the bush. Took a different route for a walk with my roommate today. Here's what I got to see today.


Source
I forgot sunscreen today. I came back a little red. Darn my red hair, and fair skin complexion.


Source
That's a Herring net out there. Herring boom this time of year in the sea, and many think the Herring inadvertently brought that whale in.


Source
This location becomes a fishing village in the summer. People already started to move in for the summer.


Source
Found this little pond on our walk over to the fishing village.

For years, I carried around a Canon AE-1 Program. That thing went on every outback trip I ever took. Great freakkin' 35mm. It finally bit the dust when we tipped a canoe in the Mohican, and I couldn't get it into a bag of rice soon enough. Rusted internals, fried processor. (Stupid me... I thought we didn't need 'dry bags' for the trip. After all, it was the Mohican- no class 4's where we were going. What could possibly go wrong? )

Luckily, I inherited my wife's bro-in-law's A-1, and continued without missing a beat.

Amassed a nice collection of lenses, as well. The standard 50mm, an everyday 35-150mm zoom, a couple of zoom teles and a 28. Macro adaptor. All of it is still upstairs in my studio, but I just don't have the time, patience, or cash to play with them any more. Film is expensive, clumsy, and harder to find than ever. Plus... I HATE relying on photo labs for decent results, and never had a darkroom of my own.

Gad, this thread is making me miss my hobby.

So... I need some advice. I won't be able to purchase a digi SLR for awhile, but it's on a (very) short list of things I still want to acquire. I loved the Canon line, and have a brand loyalty to them similar to my history with Honda automobiles. If I were to dive into the digi pool, which camera would best replicate my experiences with the AE-1 and A-1? Are there conversion interfaces that would allow me to use these fine old vintage FD lenses? Should I not limit myself to the Canon line, and seek the AE-1's equivalent with some other brand?

I loved the camera and line of lenses because they were affordable, effective and reliable. My criteria haven't changed since 1978, when I took up the hobby.

Any advice?

(I just realized that this post could become a potential thread hijack, so maybe we should continue this via PM...)

Nah, I think this thread works for photo posting, questions about photography, gear related questions, and a launching point for photography. JFan and other help me improve my skills, and we answer each other's questions.
----------------------------




I'm a Nikon guy, but only for economical reasons. The body I picked featured a top of the line sensor (24 megapixels), a compact body, and the comparable Nikon paled in comparison despite the more expensive price tag. I got mine for less than $400. What kills you with purchases, as you probably found out, are the lenses. I've got a lens worth more than my camera body, but the pictures show how worth that purchase is to me.

I shoot with a Nikon D3300, and that's Nikon's go to for entry level DSLRs. It's a crop frame compared to a full frame SLR, but it does the job quite well. Still not sure I'll EVER shell out $1,000+ for a camera body, and lenses that cost at least $550-600.

The other crop frames offer more focus points, "weather sealed" (also needs weather sealed lenses for true weather sealing) bodies, HDR capabilities, fancier video recording options, and "better" image quality based on the sensor buffer. I'm content with my D3300 as it trains me to get the most out of a basic DSLR.

Canon questions, along with compatibility of your old gear, seem to be more of JFan's and Arch's area of expertise. I'm only a year into this hobby, and I still learn new things every time I take it out for a shoot. I don't think your old gear would auto-focus on the new bodies, but I think there's a possibilities they're compatible somehow with the new DSLRs.

Here's some links for starter DSLRs:
Canon EOS T5 Rebel

Nikon D3300

If I recall, the A1 series were prosumer class cameras. The current models in that line are the full frame 5Diii and the crop frame 7Dii (which is what I currently use). They also have the 80d which has similar features but cuts costs with less expensive materials and less weather sealing. The technology advancements are incredible, and even the entry level Rebels take professional quality photos.

Your fd lenses can work on these cameras with an adaptor, but you lose autofocus.

That's about all I can type on my phone right now, I'll have more info tonight.

...cont'd. If you'd like, you're more than welcome to use my backup (50d) and a couple lenses for a month or so to get a taste for shooting digital.

Dang, jfan... that's way generous.

I might just take you up on your offer, once the season slows down.


#blownaway

Wow nice backup. Mine backup is an Olympus e-510.

It's about 8yrs old. My previous camera to that was the original Digital Rebel that I bought around y2k....which still took excellent pics until my son gave it an accidental saltwater soaking in 2014. I just got the 7dii earlier this year, so I'm on the 8yr camera plan.

My only camera is an Olympus D-450. I think I bought it somewhere around 1999. It was one of the best on the market at the time.

It has survived life at an auto dealership, (used to take pictures of cars for the website) and all kinds of danger. It's still going strong, although the zoom doesn't always extend/retract as it should.

Hey, jfan:

I just did a quick search of the units you described in your previous post. Off-the-hook unbelievable cash outlay!

I bought my Canon AE-1 Program (and the entire start-up package) for about $350 US. At the same time, Larry (my wife's bro-in-law) got his A-1 kit for about $500 US.

The bodies of these new digis (without lenses of any kind) cost more than a grand??? I've been outta the 'hobbyist's camera game' for far too long, I guess.

STICKER SHOCK

I was trying to get back in the game with a cash outlay of roughly the same damage as I took back in the late 1970's. I always knew that photography was not a 'poor man's hobby,'' but I had no idea that the cost of current membership was so steep.

I loved being able to compose/frame/manipulate my shots like a pro on a 'pauper's pension.' I'm having a tough time reconciling the 'entry cost' of jumping to digital.

1.5K to get just the body?

Has inflation really brought us to this????


I don't wanna spend the rest of my life using an 'afforable point & shoot' held at arm's length. Any dolt can do that. I miss looking through a viewfinder and composing a shot before I push that button.

Is there any hope for me?


,
Clem.

You can get a good crop frame DSLR, that's what I shoot on, with that price, or get a entry level body with some nice glass to go along with it.

There's hope. You can spend roughly somewhere in the middle of 330-500 on a good body, and a decent set of lenses.

Those cameras are in the prosumer class, similar to your AE-1. They have heavy duty weather sealing, magnesium bodies and the latest sensors. The Rebel series will take professional quality pics, but they have plastic bodies, less weather sealing, slower FPS, noisier low light performance, etc. The sensors are very high quality and will fit your price range...especially if you buy an earlier than current model. My son has a T3i and I can vouch for the quality of pics it's capable of. It came with 18-55 and 70-300 lenses, all for around 500. It also takes excellent video. I think that's the camera Arch has, also.

Clem, it can cost less today, not more. In the "old days", you paid upfront and you paid and paid and paid as you went. That $350 in the early 80's using an inflation calculator is now $850. So lets start there.

We had our 35mm cameras. You had the AE1 I had a Pentax Super Program I bought in 83. We had the fanciest devices of the time, we could use it straight manual, aperture priority, shutter priority or a blending as desired. We'd go buy our 24 or 36 exposure roll of film, and all exposures were going to be the same ISO, so if you were shooting that baseball game and bought 400, you'd better shoot all the shots because that same 400 isn't going to work well back at the house after dinner with the neighbors. You could wait to use the rest of the film you didn't shoot or roll it up and take it to your favorite photo store and pay to have whatever you shot developed. More for the 1 hour joints. Then see what you took. Some were okay, some sucked but what you have is what you have.

Now you have digital. No more film, every shot can be a different ISO, no more waiting to get it developed, you can see the shot on the back of your camera, right now. Instant gratification. Certainly that feature alone is worth a couple of bucks. You aren't limited to the amount of exposures on your roll of film but the memory card in your camera and it can literally hold thousands of shots. You can shoot in RAW or JPG or both. RAW you can take back to your computer and develop your shot yourself. Whizbang switches of all magnitudes to tinker with. Your white balance was off, no problem you can fix it. Couldn't do that in the old days. Need more contrast, grab your mouse it's just a click away. JPG you can send right away to your family and friends. You choose.

You used to be limited to 400 or 800 ISO, now you can go up to 3200, shutter speeds for your camera was 1/1000th, my 7D will do 1/8000th. You can set up the camera to do bracketed shots, 3 frames at a time with different exposure settings and later take them back to your computer and merge them into one shot taking advantage of the lighting for each. You can do 1 to 3 stops higher and/or lower for each shot. We've all taken that picture inside a room with a window and light coming in, much brighter than the room, you had to choose which to set for, the room lighting in which case your window was just a hotspot or the window lighting in which case your room was just a shadow. Now you get to see both in their proper exposure setting all in one picture. Those features are certainly worth a buck or two as well.

My 7D is discontinued and I've had mine for 5 years. Jfan has the latest version out the Mark II, it's $1500 on Amazon, so it's really only $619 in 83 dollars. Now would you have paid $619 for a camera that could do all this in 83? Jfans Mark II is a far superior camera and can do more, I'm just listing what mine can do. You can still buy my 7D though, new on Amazon for $899, that's only $370 in 83 money. Now we're talking, you can pay the same thing and not have to keep feeding that kitty film and developing costs time and time again for the same money you paid then!

I'm surprised you don't have two already.

Not really a flower person, I have no idea what this is, just loved the way the sun was hitting the water drops.



This looks better bigger.

This one was fun. Having to hold the shutter open long enough to blur the waterfall but keeping the foreground leaves focused. Thankfully it wasn't windy.



Larger Size

I have a Nikon 5500 and I love it. I would love to share some of my pics but, not sure how to do it. Do I have to set something up online as the forum wont let me upload something from my computer.

Head to IMGUR, upload the photo, right-click the photo, click "copy URL location", and then follow the steps here on the board to post it. That's how I do it.

----------------------------------

Currently sitting in a hotel in Anchorage. Hoping the weather clears up tomorrow, and that I can get out to take some beautiful shots. Alaska Highway-1 offers a constant picturesque view.

I love taking photos of my dogs. Here are our setters...Bentley & Rufus. I give them at the very least a 3 mile run (off leash) every day but on the weekends we try to give them 5-8 miles. As they are setters they need to run and boy do they! If I do 5 miles I bet they easily do 10! Here are a few photos of my boys:

[img:left][/img]

[img:left][/img]

They are gorgeous!

Thank you. I think so too! As a kid, I grew up with labs and spaniels and my wife and I owned a beagle for 14 years. But, my heart is now completely with setters and I can't imagine a life without one. They are good for me too as rain, snow, sleet, mud or sun...we are hiking with them every day!

I always save this thread for last. It washes away all the crap I get on me from the political and religious threads.

][/url]

Big sky.

A yellow warbler working on her nest last week.

This is a panorama of Portland I took a couple months ago before the blossom really kicked off. This is actually 6 separate photos (left to right) that I stitched together using Photoshop to make the panorama. I have lived in Portland for 9 years now and the city has changed dramatically. Population growth, gentrification and construction are the buzz words. But, I still enjoy living in this town. 30 minutes either way and you can be in dramatic landscape. 2 hours west and you are on the Pacific Coast or 2 hours east you are in high desert. The dramatic geographical change is stunning.

PortlandDawg may appreciate this...I woke up very early on a Sunday and pulled over on the top deck of the Fremont to shoot this photo. I am glad I did because not too long after I noticed they were putting up fencing, which would have destroyed this shot.

[img:left][/img]

Nice shot(s). Dangerous move stopping on the Fremont though. Well done!

In the 15 years I've been here it's crazy how much has changed. I lived in the Hawthorne hood just off Laurelhurst Park. The rents there now are outlandish. The apartment I lived in has doubled in cost. Now $1200 a month. Insane.
That said growth is not all bad. You can tell how well a city is doing by the number of cranes you can count in its' skyline. Portland has a bunch of cranes right now. The amount of vertical growth, high rises, over the past few years is crazy. There's a reason. Portland is a great place to live. I'd rather be in a city of tower cranes than a city of bulldozers like Detroit. Yes the traffic sucks and home prices are climbing, but my commute is short and I bought in before the boom. So to me it's a win. Either way, you can't stop progress.

Early morning on a Sunday meant there was little traffic and there is actually a shoulder. I was more concerned people may have thought I was a jumper but, I think my camera may have given me away. Crossing the Fremont going to the west side is my favorite view of the skyline.




I don't think gentrification in itself is too bad. I first visited Portland in 1990 and remember the Pearl as a dark, abandoned, sketchy, drugged out area. Not dissimilar to Old Town. Sure, it is easy to make fun of it now with its $$$ and little bit of SoCal vibe but, I will take it as it is now any day over the abandoned buildings and sketchy people. The Industrial lower southeast is the next up and coming area that we will see really change. Old Town too but, not sure how they will get it to be like the Pearl or an extension of the Pearl with all the soup kitchens, missions and rescue shelters. As long as they remain it will always be ground zero for the homeless community and I don't see the folks who are buying into the Pearl wanting to walk out of their uber-expensive condos and stumble over a homeless person or drug addict.

My biggest beef with the development other than the price increse is the neighborhoods are all beginning to look the same. Hawthorne and Belmont have mainted their identity but, Mississippi/Williams/Alberta and Division all look a tad bit cookie cutter. Same kinda shops, same new condo/apartments, same restaurants, same people. I also miss the anarchic brilliance of what Last Thursday *used* to be like. I remember going to it summer 2007 when we moved here and it was like the parking lot of a Grateful Dead show. Loads of revelers, psychedelic buses with people hula hooping on top, a lot of outsider art, bands on every street corner. It was really cool. But, I also didn't live there so, I can imagine for the locals the party probably got old. The taming of it, however, means it definitely has lost its appeal for me.

But, on the whole the city is definitely growing up and is clearly a magnet for people. That is always a good thing. That "show" certainly hasn't helped with the influx nor has the NY Times constantly writing about Portland. But, it is what it is.

A lot of great pics in this thread, and that is one awesome shot!

Anchorage rocks. Enjoy the beauty I saw this morning.


Bigger


Bigger


Bigger


Bigger


Bigger


Bigger


Bigger

Clem (and anybody else looking for a DSLR/Lenses): There are some sweet deals on the Canon refurb site. These cameras are in like new condition and come with a good warranty:

Canon

Oh, MAN!

That is simply beautiful.
It's the kind of picture that actually make the viewer feel something.

That is the goal and purpose of Art.

I dunno if Nikon has a similar setup, but as Jfan said, Canon Outlet is the real deal. Refurbished stuff at reduced cost with a new warranty.

I'll also add that, more often than not, the "refurb'd" camera body you just bought from them will have a shutter count at less than 100. I don't care if it says refurb on it, that's a new camera. That happened to me when I bought my T6s, and I've heard similar stories. For something like a camera, which will stay with you for a while with good care, this is a no-brainer.

Clem (or anyone reading), I have a Rebel T2i that I started on and just recently upgraded from. PM me if you're interested.

And of course they do.

Nikon Refurbs

NYC on final approach to Newark on a foggy morning in November 2015