Anyone into still photography?
 

I've been fooling around with still photography for about a year now. I like digital the best, its gives you more freedom than the conventional chemical based darkroom, and its not as messy. Here is a pic I took yesterday;
http://home.attbi.com/~jimreinhardt/IMG_0082edweb.JPG
Some other pics of mine are at http://home.attbi.com/~jimreinhardt

If anyone else is into still photography, i'd be pleased to see your work...post away!.
Chris Reinhardt

EDIT; why isnt VB code working?
EDIT #2 WHy dont they allow vB code or HTML? That's just about the stupidest thing i've ever seen....oh well....

Chris:

I was a still photographer for 30+ years before getting into film and video (the bulk of my business remains photojournalism and contract still photography). Nikons for field work and Mamiyas for the studio. Got into digital two years ago with the Nikon D1 and now digital accounts for 75 percent of my still work (with the D1H and D1X).

I think still photography (particularly photojournalism) provides a good base for film work because it requires both composition and storytelling skills. Gordon Parks, for example, was a successful still photographer before venturing into film.

Doug

<<<-- Originally posted by Doug Thompson : Chris:

I was a still photographer for 30+ years before getting into film and video (the bulk of my business remains photojournalism and contract still photography). Nikons for field work and Mamiyas for the studio. Got into digital two years ago with the Nikon D1 and now digital accounts for 75 percent of my still work (with the D1H and D1X).
-->>>

Doug,

How do you like the digital Nikon cameras? I have wanted one for quite some time now, but have not pulled the trigger. From everything that I have read, it appears to be the one I want.

Recently I sold my Mamiya RZ Pro to help fund the purchase of my XL1s. I wish that I would have kept that camera. It truly produced some woderful images. I also sold my Leica M6 for the same reason.

<<<-- Originally posted by Studio975 :
How do you like the digital Nikon cameras? I have wanted one for quite some time now, but have not pulled the trigger. From everything that I have read, it appears to be the one I want. -->>>

The D1H is my workhorse. Good resolution for most applications, fast with a 45 frame buffer and built like a tank. I've shot magazine covers with it and made prints up to 16 by 20. When you combine it with the AFS lenses, it delivers outstanding images.

The D1X adds resolution on the high end, but you sacrifice speed (the buffer and burst mode is useless for action photography) and ISO sensitivity. I use it only when a client wants a poster size or above image.

Haven't tried the digital backs for the Mamiya. Still use an F5 when a client insists on slides.

Nikon let me borrow a D100 for two weeks. Incredible resolution but it doesn't have the speed I need and I doubt it would hold up to professional use. I ordered a second D1H instead.

You gave up two good cameras to get a good video camera. I've never owned a Lecia but I love their precision and optics. Now, if I could just find a way to use Nikon AFS lenses on an Xl1S...

Doug

Doug,

Yes it was VERY hard to part with those two cameras. They both took care of me for many years. With the move towards DV, I just could not afford to have both. Plus I would like to move towards a digital still camera. It provides much greater image flexibility.

The D1H sounds like it would fit the bill for me as well. I shoot a lot of action type of stuff, which requires a fast camera. What is the going rate for one of these dudes?

<<<-- Originally posted by Studio975 :

The D1H sounds like it would fit the bill for me as well. I shoot a lot of action type of stuff, which requires a fast camera. What is the going rate for one of these dudes? -->>>

$4350 is the current "discounted" price but if you have a good relationship with a Nikon Professional Products dealer, the going rate if usually about $500 less than that. They had a $500 instant rebate going a few months back but I think it has ended.

If you don't have a pro dealer you deal with in Houston, try Roberts Imaging in Indianapolis or Penn Camera in Washington. Both cater to pros.

Doug

I'm really starting to get into still photography.
I bought an OLD Pentax Spotmatic SLR at a garage sale for $30 a few years ago, to try out photography. Then shortly after, I got a neat little Canon S100 digital Elph and left the SLR in a box collecting dust. In the last 6 months, I've needed to do some sports photography and of course the S100 is useless for that (2x zoom), so I pulled out the old Pentax and fired her up. I picked up a 90-230mm zoom lens for $30 and a 2x teleconverter for $10, and it rocks. Every now and then I think about buying a new SLR camera that can take a few shots per second (and has autofocus). But on the other hand, I still haven't spent $100 on the camera I have and it takes great pictures. I will upgrade eventually, but I'd like to see digital SLR prices come down a bit first.

Doug

OpTex makes a Nikon to XL Lens Adapter http://www.xl1s.com/ It works similar to the EF Adapter that Canon makes. It also multiplies the focal length by a factor of 7.2x This makes a 300mm Nikor lens effectively 2160mm. Great for nature and wildlife work, but limited for every day shootong. ZGC is US Dist. of OpTex http://www.zgc.com/ .

Jeff

<<<-- Originally posted by Doug Thompson : <<<-- Originally posted by

$4350 is the current "discounted" price but if you have a good relationship with a Nikon Professional Products dealer, the going rate if usually about $500 less than that. They had a $500 instant rebate going a few months back but I think it has ended.

Doug -->>>

Yikes! That is the amount of my XL1s with the 16x Manual Servo Lens. I have seen the D1 for around $2000, but I would rather have a faster rig.

Thanks for the tip regarding Pro Dealers.

Paul

<<<-- Originally posted by Dylan Couper : I'm really starting to get into still photography.
I bought an OLD Pentax Spotmatic SLR at a garage sale for $30 a few years ago, to try out photography. Then shortly after, I got a neat little Canon S100 digital Elph and left the SLR in a box collecting dust. In the last 6 months, I've needed to do some sports photography and of course the S100 is useless for that (2x zoom), so I pulled out the old Pentax and fired her up. I picked up a 90-230mm zoom lens for $30 and a 2x teleconverter for $10, and it rocks. Every now and then I think about buying a new SLR camera that can take a few shots per second (and has autofocus). But on the other hand, I still haven't spent $100 on the camera I have and it takes great pictures. I will upgrade eventually, but I'd like to see digital SLR prices come down a bit first. -->>>

Sounds like a good setup for occasional use but you probably couldn't make a living in photography with it. As with any creative endeavor, it's the eye that controls the equipment more than the equipment itself but you still have to have the hardware to turn out a quality product.

<<<-- Originally posted by Jeff Donald : Doug

OpTex makes a Nikon to XL Lens Adapter http://www.xl1s.com/ It works similar to the EF Adapter that Canon makes. It also multiplies the focal length by a factor of 7.2x This makes a 300mm Nikor lens effectively 2160mm. Great for nature and wildlife work, but limited for every day shootong. ZGC is US Dist. of OpTex http://www.zgc.com/ .

Jeff -->>>

Jeff:

Thanks for the tip. I'll check it out. We're about to add a widescreen HD Betacam to our equipment mix so I may concentrate more on adding lenses to it, but the adapter is certainly worth considering.

Doug

<<<-- Originally posted by Studio975 :

Yikes! That is the amount of my XL1s with the 16x Manual Servo Lens. I have seen the D1 for around $2000, but I would rather have a faster rig.

Thanks for the tip regarding Pro Dealers.

Paul -->>>

Used D1s are available from a lot of sources for around 2K and they are good cameras (I still have one as a backup). Pro level Nikons have never been cheap (neither have pro level Canons). But someone who has owned a Lecia should know that...

Doug

<<<-- Originally posted by Doug Thompson : <<<-- Originally posted by

Used D1s are available from a lot of sources for around 2K and they are good cameras (I still have one as a backup). Pro level Nikons have never been cheap (neither have pro level Canons). But someone who has owned a Lecia should know that...

Doug -->>>

LOL .. So very true. The Leica was a great camera and it served me well. You can't beat them for quality. All though my Leica was only $1800.00. I will probably get a used D1, since it is a bit more closer to my budget. Still would like to have one of the faster models.

Have you ever checked out www.photo.net? That place amazes me with great pictures everyday.

<<<-- Originally posted by Studio975 :

Have you ever checked out www.photo.net? That place amazes me with great pictures everyday. -->>>

Haven't checked it out, but I will. Thanks for the tip.

Doug

Two other photography sites to check out are:
www.dpreview.com and www.dpchallenge.com

I have a question though, what's the difference between still photography and just plain old photography?

<<<-- Originally posted by mikeysbistro :
I have a question though, what's the difference between still photography and just plain old photography? -->>>

Webster's Defines Photography as: "the art or process of producing images on a sensitized surface (as a film) by the action of radiant energy and especially light," which does not suggest a difference between still and motion photography (it also does not make allowances for digital).

To me, filmmaking is just as much photography as still work. It is the creative art of capturing images to film (or chip).

Doug

good point...i put the still in there for *those* people who would think it was Dv related....actually..no...I don't knoiw why I put it in there...oh well...no worries....great meteor shower tonight...wish I had my camera with me......what a shame....
Chris
http://home.attbi.com/~jimreinhardt

<<<-- Originally posted by Doug Thompson : <<<-- Originally posted by Dylan Couper : I'm really starting to get into still photography.
I bought an OLD Pentax Spotmatic SLR at a garage sale for $30 a few years ago, to try out photography. -->>>

Sounds like a good setup for occasional use but you probably couldn't make a living in photography with it. As with any creative endeavor, it's the eye that controls the equipment more than the equipment itself but you still have to have the hardware to turn out a quality product. -->>>

Fortunately, I'm not trying to make a living at it. :)
I am planning on getting a new camera a lot sooner than my post implied. I've just got to decide what to get. Lots of choices. Digital or not. And I'd like to get a camera whose lenses can be used on the XL1, of course. ;)

I think it depends on what you want to use your still camera for. Canon EF lenses (or 3rd party lenses with EF mounts) are the only lenses that will directly fit the XL mount. Canon EF lenses are the only ones that fit their AF 35mm SLR bodies. Look for a clean used Canon Rebel 2000 or Rebel G. I think we are several years away from an affordable (under $1000) digital SLR body. A clean, used body will run under $200. The lenses run any where from $50 on up depending on the type, brand, zoom range, condition etc.

Jeff

<<<-- Originally posted by Jeff Donald : I think it depends on what you want to use your still camera for. Canon EF lenses (or 3rd party lenses with EF mounts) are the only lenses that will directly fit the XL mount. Canon EF lenses are the only ones that fit their AF 35mm SLR bodies. Look for a clean used Canon Rebel 2000 or Rebel G. I think we are several years away from an affordable (under $1000) digital SLR body. A clean, used body will run under $200. The lenses run any where from $50 on up depending on the type, brand, zoom range, condition etc.

Jeff -->>>

I would have to agree with you. The interesting thing to note, is that in the film world (photography) you can get a decent SLR for around $600.00 (body only). In fact I have seen F100's around that price range. That is a great camera for the money.

Phil Askey does a great job of reviewing the latest digital cameras on dpreview.com, as mentioned before, but for me the most entertaining part are the forums.

'My Nikon is better than your Canon any day' etc etc, and as for the CompactFlash vs Microdrive arguments - handbags at dawn!

Well worth a look. It is the site I normally point the medical staff who wander in saying something like "I want a digital camera that does this, this and this but only cost this" (as is their want).

They somehow expect you to know the pros & cons of every domestic camera on the market - 'but your a professional photographer - why don't you know??' :-(

Ross

<<<-- Originally posted by Paul Sedillo : The interesting thing to note, is that in the film world (photography) you can get a decent SLR for around $600.00 (body only). In fact I have seen F100's around that price range. That is a great camera for the money. -->>>

The F100 is he steal of the Nikon line. 85 percent of the functionality of the F5 at 60 percent of the size and 50 percent (or less) of the price. If it had a mirror lockup function it would be perfect. The D1H/X is based on the F100 body.

I have a Coolpix 5000 that stays locked in the console of my Jeep as a "just in case" camera. It delivers incredibly sharp photos.

Doug

Doug,

Yes, no doubt about the F100. It is a great rig for the money. My camera of choice for the vehicle is a little Yashica T4. It has a Ziess lens and is at a great price point. Plus it is small enough to take just about anywhere.

I keep watching eBay looking for an F100. That will be my next SLR.

My department has been using two Nikon FE's for over twenty years, athough we have been digital for five years now (currently using Kodak DCS 620's).

I guess the FE's (and our F2's) are still going strong because these cameras have brass cogs rather than plastic.

They still get used regularly by students who learn the basics before we let them loose on the digital kit.

My own favourite is my 'F' Photomic bought S/H in in 1975 although it now only deals with holiday snaps......

Ross

<<<-- Originally posted by Ross Milligan : My department has been using two Nikon FE's for over twenty years, athough we have been digital for five years now (currently using Kodak DCS 620's).

I guess the FE's (and our F2's) are still going strong because these cameras have brass cogs rather than plastic.

They still get used regularly by students who learn the basics before we let them loose on the digital kit.

My own favourite is my 'F' Photomic bought S/H in in 1975 although it now only deals with holiday snaps......

Ross -->>>

Ross:

I've still got an old "F", an F2 and two FM-2s in the closet and use them from time to time to remember the good old days when men were men and cameras required focusing and metering. Hell, my old Luna Pro still works. The F is built like a tank. I think I still have a 4x5 Speed Graphic in the closet somewhere (anybody know where I can get some Plus-X sheet film?).

I wonder sometimes if I still have eye to use manual, though. I've gotten used to letting the camera handle the focus and exposure and concentrating on composition. We get used to the tools we use. The F5 is still my favorite camera and I would us it more but most clients want the speed and convenience of digital. Last weekend, however, I took my Jeep up in the mountains with just the F5 and the 80-400 VR zoom and had a ball. Then I sorted the slides, picked the ones I wanted, popped them in the scanner and went back to digital.

Doug

The first 'professional' photographer I ever met, while at High school, was the senior press photographer for a now defunct national newspaper in Scotland.

He used a 'F' with no metering at all - he could look a scene and tell you what aperture and shutter speed it would require. How many of us could de that today and get it right everytime!

Fortunately in my field, medical, we do not use auto focus because it can be fooled to much by the conditions we work in.

I will confess that it is tempting to use the flash on auto....... but I really should not, the depth of field at f32 on manual is much better than what you get at f11 on auto :-)

Ross

Good thread. I'm coming into this forum from the other end, i.e., still photography. I have a Sony TRV820 but I'm looking very seriously at the Canon GL-2. Most of my shooting is in travel (primarily Asia) and skiing and sailing. I've had two Canon slrs which have been very good to me. Currently I use the now-discontinued EOS 5. the two lenses I use are the EF 28-105 and and EF 100-300.

The point about the interchangeability of Canon lenses is important. For years I used an FX 1 and had some very good lenses but when Canon changed their lens system I was out of luck. I know there are adaptors but I've been told they are rather kludgy. However, I don't think Canon will change again or at least not soon. :-) The EOS 5 is still available and I think it is a good buy.

Sandy

hello,
i know this is a little dated thread but i've pretty much decided on the digital camera to get and was looking for some opinions from you knowledgeable folks. it's the olympus c-4000z model. other than messing around a little bit with my dad's old minolta x370(that's in desperate need for a good cleaning). this would be my first still/digital cam. for the price it looks like it's loaded with features that will keep very involved and happy. i should be getting it this week. it's definitely not a pro cam, but from the features and price it seems like a really nice deal for my level. the most notable issue with it i've read so far is it's startup time is considered slow (9sec. i read at a few places). and release/exposure time is a bit slow (1sec.). i don't plan i shooting any kind of action. just mainly something for me to sharpen my eye and have a good time with. thanks for any info.

also apart from the sites mentioned before (those are great sites), i found www.steves-digicams.com to have good reviews, thorough and well written.

matt