Talk to me about cameras

13»

Replies

  • seppalaseppala Senior Member Posts: 1,916 Senior Member
    George K wrote: »
    Sep- Canon and Nikon both are good choices, as are Panasonic and Olympus, despite what fanboys may tell you. It really comes down to how it feels in your hand, the menu system and the lenses you may want to acquire. Other brands make excellent interchangeable lens cameras, but with fewer lenses available.

    Personally I cannot overemphasize menu systems. Make sure it works for you. I speak from experience. I bought and later sold an Olympus OMD-5 because it offered everything I wanted. But I could not get used to the menus, which I found counter-intuitive and hard to use. For me Panasonic menus are intuitive and easy to work with. If you look at the M43 forum on DPR (http://www.dpreview.com/) many other users have the same complaint.

    If you wind up with a Canon APS-C body I highly recommend the Canon 15-85 mm lens. It's expensive, but worth it. The buiod and optical quality is superb and the range (24-135 FF equivalent) is terrific for a do-it-all lens.

    If you buy a kit of any sort I do not think any current kit lenses are really bad. A few actually are quite good, such as the Panasonic 14-45 and 14-42 Mk II. I always was happy with Canon 18-55 kit lenses when I used APS-C. I have no experience with Nikon.

    Funny you should say that, George. I've got a Canon Point and Shoot and I hate the **** menu. I would have never thought about that, though.

    Thanks for all the information. In a perfect world I'd end up with three lenses - one general use, one close up, one telephoto.
  • BufordBuford Senior Member Posts: 2,925 Senior Member
    I think I'll throw my Kodak DX7590 in the trash.
    Just look at the flowers Lizzie just look at the flowers.
  • George KGeorge K Super Moderator Posts: 9,547 Senior Member
    Buford wrote: »
    I think I'll throw my Kodak DX7590 in the trash.

    Only if it no longer suits your needs, in which case donate it.

    Seriously, if what you have is what you need why change it?
    Keep your stinkin' government hands off my Medicare.
  • Scott ButnerScott Butner Senior Member Posts: 3,918 Senior Member
    seppala wrote: »
    Funny you should say that, George. I've got a Canon Point and Shoot and I hate the **** menu. I would have never thought about that, though.

    that's pretty much what I said back on page one, when I talked about ergonomics and usability.

    The technical differences between cameras in every day photography are vanishingly small, but a camera you don't use because it's a pain in the ****, is not going to perform well for you.
  • jbillyjbilly Senior Member Posts: 5,108 Senior Member
    but a camera you don't use because it's a pain in the ****, is not going to perform well for you.

    A camera you "lose" under the seat in your car doesn't perfrom well for you either. Un no I don't have any experience with that.

    [/lots of four letter words under breath]
  • FishTXFishTX Super Moderator Posts: 7,883 Senior Member
    seppala wrote: »
    In a perfect world I'd end up with three lenses - one general use, one close up, one telephoto.
    There a couple ways you can make any lens do close ups. The first and often not the best are close up lenses that you put on like a filter. Often they are not well made if you buy cheap lenses. That isn't worth the savings.

    Another way that has been around for years are extension tubes. They go between the lens and the camera body to increase the distance between lens and film/sensor. They usually come in a set of three, each a different thickness. You can use each alone or combine two or use all three. The farther the lens is from the film/sensor the greater the closer you can get to the subject. I've used them on telephotos for lizards and such because I can get a close up and stay just far enough away from the animal to not spook it. Buy them at Amazon. A set should run under $15 if they are plastic. Metal is obviously stronger, but should be around $25 or less.

    If you order them, make sure the set has auto focus contacts that bridge the gap between the lens' contacts and the body's contacts. If not you have to manually focus which isn't easy in close ups because the DoF is so narrow it is hard to nail the focus.
    "We have to find someone who can not only fly this plane, but who didn't have fish for dinner."

    Crooow:This music would work better with women in bikinis shaking all over the place. I guess that's true of any music really.
  • seppalaseppala Senior Member Posts: 1,916 Senior Member
    that's pretty much what I said back on page one, when I talked about ergonomics and usability.

    Huh. I stopped reading after "I don't have a clue." I figured the rest was just filler.

    :)

    But you're right. I don't use the point and shoot because it's a pain in the ****. The autofocus isn't great - between hitting the button and the camera actually snapping the picture can be a couple seconds, and more often than not it focuses on the wrong thing - so I just use my phone.
  • ricinusricinus Senior Member Posts: 6,214 Senior Member
    When did we lose ELI5??

    Mike
    My new goal in life is to become an Alter Kaker...
  • FishTXFishTX Super Moderator Posts: 7,883 Senior Member
    You need a newer point and shoot. I have one that has very little lag between the shutter button and the shutter opening and it has very good image quality for the small sensor. It usually stays in my cruising vest, so I have something nice to use at work without hiking back to the truck for a bigger camera and wasting work time.

    And if you guys get a camera with video capability, then you'll need a class 10 or higher memory card for video. Slower cards and those with smaller storage capacity work fine for most still photography.
    "We have to find someone who can not only fly this plane, but who didn't have fish for dinner."

    Crooow:This music would work better with women in bikinis shaking all over the place. I guess that's true of any music really.
  • George KGeorge K Super Moderator Posts: 9,547 Senior Member
    FishTX wrote: »
    There a couple ways you can make any lens do close ups. The first and often not the best are close up lenses that you put on like a filter. Often they are not well made if you buy cheap lenses. That isn't worth the savings.

    The two element ones are far better optically and sufficient for many folks' needs. Extension tubes and bellows are better, but bulky.
    Keep your stinkin' government hands off my Medicare.
  • Shawn C.Shawn C. Senior Member Posts: 6,343 Senior Member
    **** is a cruiser vest?


    Sent from my ObamaPhone using Tapatalk
  • BufordBuford Senior Member Posts: 2,925 Senior Member
    George K wrote: »
    Only if it no longer suits your needs, in which case donate it.

    Seriously, if what you have is what you need why change it?

    I'll run that camera until it breaks. It does what I need and it does a good job.
    Just look at the flowers Lizzie just look at the flowers.
  • FishTXFishTX Super Moderator Posts: 7,883 Senior Member
    I've never used two element close up lenses. I have set of decent Vivitar lenses from back when the companies that manufactured that brand did a good job. The drawback is they are 49mm threads, so they only fit some nice, but old lenses. On the bright side, those are the lenses I use with adapters to give me some fast glass.
    "We have to find someone who can not only fly this plane, but who didn't have fish for dinner."

    Crooow:This music would work better with women in bikinis shaking all over the place. I guess that's true of any music really.
  • BuffcoBuffco Senior Member Posts: 10,141 Senior Member
    Fish what do you use for macro shots?
  • George KGeorge K Super Moderator Posts: 9,547 Senior Member
    FishTX wrote: »
    I've never used two element close up lenses. I have set of decent Vivitar lenses from back when the companies that manufactured that brand did a good job. The drawback is they are 49mm threads, so they only fit some nice, but old lenses. On the bright side, those are the lenses I use with adapters to give me some fast glass.

    Alas there are dozens of respected brand names that now are attached to products of questionable quality, not made by the out-of-business manufacturer. Vivitar, Polaroid, and Kodak are examples.

    Two-element lenses used to cost $30-40, now are higher. I have two that work well. Get the largest you need and then use step-down rings. One of the photo mags tested the off brand against the name brands and found them equally good. They are far, far better than single element models. For the non-OEM brands, just buy by size, ignoring the claim of which mfg lens they are for. They are all the same.

    http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=two-element+close-up+lens&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Atwo-element+close-up+lens
    Keep your stinkin' government hands off my Medicare.
  • FishTXFishTX Super Moderator Posts: 7,883 Senior Member
    That is also what I want to start doing with filters. Buy one high quality 72mm filter for all my lenses. I already own the step down filter rings and I use them on every lens with a Cokin holder and graduated neutral density filter.

    I almost never use the screw on close up lenses. I either use extension tube which are really affordable or I use an Olympus 50mm macro lens I've had for about 30 years. I can also use the macro lens with an extension tube to get closer. The beauty of tubes are affordability, they'll work with all your lenses and they have no glass in them. No glass means you don't run the risk of putting poor glass between your lens and the camera's sensor.

    And along those lines, buy the best filters you can afford. No sense putting a poor filter in front on a good lens. As for filters a graduated neutral density (ND) filter, a non-graduated ND filter and a polarizing filter will cover pretty much all your needs. The two ND filters cut down light. The plane ND can be use in bright situations so you can use a higher ISO if you want, get slower shutter speeds, or use a wider aperture. You'll learn when this is an advantage.

    The graduated ND starts dark at the top and by the time it gets down around the middle of the filter it becomes clear. When you you want to take a landscape and the sky is a lot brighter than the land and the exposure for one doesn't work for the other, the graduated ND tames the brightness of the sky so you can get an exposure that works for the entire scene.

    The polarizer can tame reflections on water and windshields and when pointed in the right direction can give you a deeper, blue sky.
    "We have to find someone who can not only fly this plane, but who didn't have fish for dinner."

    Crooow:This music would work better with women in bikinis shaking all over the place. I guess that's true of any music really.
13»

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction.

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Fly Fisherman stories delivered right to your inbox.