Blacks2. I thought I was acceptable after I had some pix shown on the TV for a few years. Now I realize that was not the case. My pix are not as good as other folks think that they are, and in the same vein, perhaps neither are yours. I doubt it, mainly just because I've been collecting images for such a heck of along time, and when I saw your pix I just gave up. Granted, I know all about back-dropping the subjects, but you happened to have some very hardy/vigorous/healthy plants. Good job and good presentation. WOW!!!
SharpShooter wrote:
C. David wrote:
SharpShooter...Your camera doesn't suck. You do. You can't blame crappy images on the camera.It's YOU you idiot, and it does not matter if you use a Canon, or a Nikon, or a pocket-rocket....Get your crap together and get out there and take pix. Don't whine about camera's and blame the crappy pix you take on them.LEARN how to use the camera and in turn you just might learn something. I hope so.8-)
C. David, just keep in mind that one man's crappy pix, is another man's masterpiece. It's proven everyday right here on the Hog.
But not to be discouraged, I actually have a plan. I'm saving for a Canon 1DX. With that camera my photography will probably get somuch better, I'm thinking I could go pro. At least that's what I'm hoping. I just need to somehow get that camera.
quote=C. David SharpShooter...Your camera doesn't... (
show quote)
Sharpshooter...you have valid points, but it ALL BOILS DOWN TO KNOWING WHAT YOU ARE DOING. I don't give a rip if a critter is going out with a 15 grand outfit, if you don't know what the hell you are doing when it comes to taking pix, that is the point that I was trying to make. I thought that I made that evident in the earlier post. If not, It's my mistake and I apologize to you and all the rest of us "Hoggers." 8-)
I told all y'all the only word in the english language without a vowel is nth,a day or so ago. It took y'all this long to figger that out?8-)
Acountry330 wrote:
Welcome. Get yourself the best camera you can afford either Nikon or Canon in the 12 to 24 megapixel range. Then you will need a good wide angle and the longest telefoto lens you can afford. The cost can be as high or as low as you want. Now that does not include the programs you will need to process your digital images, this can run for under a hundred dollars to more than six hundred. Now comes the learning curve of digital. I hope I did not scare you off, because it is so much fun. Just open your wallet and start having fun with the rest of us.
Welcome. Get yourself the best camera you can affo... (
show quote)
No Kidding. If there was Digital back when I was eight years old, I would have saved more $$ than I care to think about. Get out and start taking pix! 8-)
And yet again, what kind of equipment do you have on hand, and what do you plan on using? Those seemingly small factoids can help us give you advise. 8-)
They all do. Be just a little bit more specific. If that is all possible. As long as we're at it, what happens to be the only word in the English Language that has NO Vowel??8-)
bripam00 wrote:
returning to the world of photography that I left twenty years ago, need some advice on what equipment I should start with and work my way up to. I will be shooting a lot of Florida nature/wildlife both in low light conditions and heat of day. Not independently wealthy, so be kind in your recommendtions. Excited and fearful
First off, what kind of gear do you have available? Just so you know, over the years you're going to collect more, limited budget or not. You don't need to be fearful, it's just the way photography is. Sure, it's scary at first, and then it becomes a passion. If you're serious sit back and enjoy the ride. :thumbup: 8-)
Who really cares? Use whichever camera ya want to, and that is that. If I prefer one type over the other, so what. This thread has gone on too long, and I fear it will only end when folks are finally disinterested with it. Case in point: Chicken or the egg. 8-)
Wabbit...thanks for ruining this thread. I understand your need to put folks down, just don't try to do it to everyone.
SharpShooter...Your camera doesn't suck. You do. You can't blame crappy images on the camera.It's YOU you idiot, and it does not matter if you use a Canon, or a Nikon, or a pocket-rocket....Get your crap together and get out there and take pix. Don't whine about camera's and blame the crappy pix you take on them.LEARN how to use the camera and in turn you just might learn something. I hope so.8-)
jlf1938 wrote:
winterrose wrote:
Why are Nikon DSLR's so much better than canon? Those who use Nikon are real photographers. Is it because a Nikon looks like a purposeful instrument whereas a canon camera reminds one more of a potato? Canon always seems to play second fiddle.
Ho Hum! I once had a Nikon film camera and at that time I said I would never have another one. Alas, however, I bought a Nikon DSLR and after a year I gave it away and bought a Canon. They do not take good images for me, Perhaps it is my electromagnitism.
quote=winterrose Why are Nikon DSLR's so much bet... (
show quote)
Perhaps it wasn't the camera's fault. Tighten up the nut behind the camera and it will work out. 8-)
Marzee wrote:
That is a very good question! I also think the Nikons seem to take better photos. The only reason I don't buy Nikon (yet), and I hope no-one takes offense on this comment, is that I read on an animal rescue causes blog that Nikon supports bull dog fighting... How true that is I'm not sure yet, but I'm trying to find out. However, it doesn't change the fact that I also think their DSLRs take better photos. I wonder if anyone has an answer to that. :)
Marzee, wherever you read that Nikon supports the dog fights, that's total B.S. Don't believe everything you read on-line. Get out and into a life where you interact with real human beings. Go out and find facts for yourself. Exercise more than just your fingers. 8-) Exercise your mind. I hope that's still possible. 8-)
Wabbit wrote:
C. David wrote:
pbearperry wrote:
The .357 mag was developed for the Police during depression years because bad guys started wearing body armor to rob banks and the .38 Spl wasn't powerful enough to get the job done.The .38 Spl case was lengthened to hold more powder therefore making it a .38 on steroids.
That is why you can fire .38 caliber ammo through a .357 frame. I would discourage this. Not at all because there is a problem with the weapons function, but because it really is a pain in the ass to clean the weapon when you're done. Gun ranges in the cities have rules to the effect as to blazing away with a .357 and have no qualms with a .38. Since I now live in the country, I'm smiling. I'll keep on using my wheel gun whenever I need to. And, by the way pbearperry, you are fairly well informed, but still work on your actual facts. Have YOU ever thrown a .38 round or twenty through your .357 ? I didn't think so. Don't waste your time trying it, and don't pretend to "Inform" the gun folks in the area what you don't know about.
:thumbdown:
quote=pbearperry The .357 mag was developed for t... (
show quote)
Hey Doc ..... why is cleaning an issue ..... is that 38 special you're talking about?
quote=C. David quote=pbearperry The .357 mag was... (
show quote)
Hey Wabbit, I don't know whom you are talking to, but as far as cleaning the .357 after using a bunch of .38's, the cylinder just is coated. I've been there, am never going back there again. In a pinch it does work, but clean-up afterwords is not worth the effort. That was something I learned back when I was in my 20's. I only push .357 through my Colt Python. Been doing it since that day. The gun range (Indoor) wouldn't allow Magnums to be fired. I guess the neighbors complained, so they didn't allow it. This is why I don't live in the cities anymore. Besides that....what the heck is the use for throwing a .38 cal down the throat of a .357? I did it once, and i will never do it again. Stupid idea.
8-)
good pix! I'd antique them though before I posted them, you have so much subject matter that you can use, and your pic is spot-on.!!!Good Job!