Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Posts for: Brucej67
Page: <<prev 1 ... 328 329 330 331 332 333 next>>
Oct 26, 2011 18:26:25   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
Does the camera matter?
PIXChuck wrote:
PIXChuck wrote:
Yes and I have Frank Sinatra's next to last concert, in Houston Texas. to prove it. Have to drag it out of my flash drive. I'll post them tomorrow. OK?.......CTP


I think they are great. None better than Old Blue Eyes.
Go to
Oct 26, 2011 17:48:21   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
Does the camera matter?
Yes, I am with you about the dark room, I had a Bessler enlarger and all the dark room equipment. I still do negative development (B&W) and scan them into Photoshop. I love DK76 and fixers. Ah the good old days. To keep at it I have a Mamiya 645 AFD and AFD II with 120/220 film back. That said I will not part with my digital gear. When I was shooting weddings I used the Mamiya RB and would use it on portraits as well. I shot landscape with my Leica's M2, M3 and M4. Those were the days when DK76 ran in our veins.
Go to
Oct 26, 2011 07:51:35   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
Picture Posing
I basically think of composition, lighting and then try to relax the models in front of the camera. If you have many people in your group photo try to pose them at their most flattering angle. In post processing run it through Portrait Professional and/or Photoshop for touchup and correction.
Go to
Oct 26, 2011 07:46:02   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
Canon vs Sony
JimH wrote:
I haven't seen any published comparison reviews yet. This (November '11) month's Outdoor Photographer has a couple of articles and reviews of the new Sony A77, and an article on mirrorless cams.


October's issue of Popular Photography has a review of the Sony A77 and rate it higher than it's competative makes from Nikon and Canon.
Go to
Oct 26, 2011 07:36:52   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
Does the camera matter?
"does the camera matter?" My take on the question would be if we are talking about DSLR and it is a matter of brand name I would say no it doesn't matter which brand you use. This is just a diffrent take on the question.
Go to
Oct 25, 2011 08:37:13   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
wolfman949
wolfman949 wrote:
Hi I would like to hear from somebody that has experience
with Sony alpha 35 or 55 cameras.I am in the marked to purchase a new dslr,aand ai am somewhat biased towards a Sony because the way the camera functions,ike fast focus (10fps).Could anybody please help to make up my mind.


Of the two mentioned I own a Sony A55. It is a good camera on nice sunny days but don't take it out in wet weather, it is not weather proof and if water gets into the electronics Sony will not honor the warrantee. I would buy the A77 instead of the A55 for this reason and a host of other reasons. I plan on selling my A55 to buy the A77. I have a friend who bought the A55, he does newspaper photography and was caught in the rain 4 months after he bought the camera and it was ruined.
Go to
Oct 24, 2011 17:59:43   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
Is Leica a good camara ?
silver wrote:
SharpShooter wrote:
I keep looking at a Leica and
would appreciate any info on this camara that anyone could
give me . Is it a good camara ? What model do you suggest
getting as an entry level to DSLR photography ? OR do any of you folks suggest a different camara for a beginner like me ?
greenjeans



A ferrari will not get you from point A to point B any faster then a Gremlin. There are such things as speed limits. Sure you will attract attention in an expensive car but thats silly.
Buying an expensive camera will not make you a better photographer. Leicas are good cameras, yes, but so are canons and nikons and other brands of cameras.

Silver, you are no longer giving Greenjeans anything useful. All of your points are 100% correct. Greenjeans asked about Leicas and which model would be good for entry level. They would ALL be good for entry level. He then ask for suggestions which is what you gave him. I will assume (bad to do) that you are arguing strictly on the merrits of cost. Nowhere did greenjeans ask us to tell him what he could afford. That would be his choice not ours.
And last I checked Cameras don't have speed limits. And I enjoyed my Gremlin when I owned one. And go ahead force that Leica on me and I will help you fight me so that I will take it. You can have my scrawny 5D2
Need to go to work now(so I can get That 1DX) so will not check back in till the tread is already played out and greenjeans probably has his leica and Julian has taken Silver for a ride and now Silver wants a Fararri too !
I keep looking at a Leica and br would appreciate ... (show quote)


Sorry to burst your bubble it would be fun to go for a ride in a fararri, I have in the past, but I would not be interested in owning one. First of all there is no place that it can be driven in the way it is intended to be driven and secondly the upkeep on these vehicles is prohibitively expensive. When it comes to cameras, I own a Nikon D700 and Nikon lenses and I am very happy with the camera and lenses. There is a new version of this camera over the horizon that I will probably get but I honestly would not be interested in a Leica. The Leicas are good cameras but I dont buy a camera because it is the most expensive or desirable. I am a working professional and I need a camera system that is readily available in rental places if I need a particular lens etc. As I have said I think that the Leica cameras and lenses are good but they will perform just the same as a Nikon or Canon. Its not worth the extra money to pay for a name. Its sad that people revere main and expensive name items. If you have a lot of money go right ahead and spend the money for name items. I still say that a Gremlin will still get you from point A to point B in the same amount of time that a Rolls Royce or a Fararri will but other then being enamored of a name I would gladly choose the Gremlin and driving up in a beaten up Gremlin will turn heads just as much as a RR or Fararri and it would be just as much fun. Also, in response to the Ansel Adams analogy I would much rather be with Ansel then go and drool over someones expensive camera, how droll can you be. I am quite sure that Ansel would agree with me on this.
quote=SharpShooter I keep looking at a Leica and ... (show quote)


Not so sure Ansel would agree, however I like comfort and would go with the RR. Unless you have owned a Leica you can't appreciate the difference. I don't know if the M9 is as much fun or as the film M series, but I do know that the film rangefinder Leica's were superior to the Nikons in their day and well worth the money, and I did make money with them.
Go to
Oct 24, 2011 16:29:41   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
Is Leica a good camara ?
donrent wrote:
The question "Is Leica a good camera" is the understatement
of the year....

Back (way back) when I was a starving Newspaper Photographer, a friend loan me his dad's Leica and Hasselblad.... The "H" was ok, but that Leica was the epidome of cameras.... Remember, this was a camera that was TOTALLY MANUAL... A leica lens could do magic... Avalable light pictures at night were unbeliveable... The details in a landscape picture were outstanding....

How the new Leica's are, I have no idea... Hopefully, their quality is still the same...
The question "Is Leica a good camera" is... (show quote)


I agree I owned 2 Leica M2, 2 M3 and one M4 along with a host of lenses, poroflex, bellows and other equipment. The dumbest thing I did was to sell them and go Canon, then Nikon and now Sony. I still miss my Leica's.
Go to
Oct 24, 2011 15:59:06   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
Is Leica a good camara ?
What Leica are you looking at? There are many models.
Go to
Oct 24, 2011 08:30:09   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
Is Leica a good camara ?
greenjeans wrote:
This is my first post . I am a real novice when it comes to being knowledgable about photography . I had a Nikon
Coolpix 100 that was stolen , and now I am interested in moving up to a DSLR . I have been researching lots of different camaras and am kind of confused as to what to replace my lost camara with . I keep looking at a Leica and
would appreciate any info on this camara that anyone could
give me . Is it a good camara ? What model do you suggest
getting as an entry level to DSLR photography ? Prices ?
Any info I would be thankful for . OR do any of you folks suggest a different camara for a beginner like me ?
greenjeans
This is my first post . I am a real novice when it... (show quote)


You ndidn't mension if you are looking at the "M" series (rangefinder) or the "S" series (DSLR). Both Leica series are high priced cameras and are top of the line on par with Haselblad, but you don't need that type of investment unless mony means nothing to you. Look at any of the premier brands like Nikon, Canon, Sony and more. Researsch their flagship models all the way down to the entry level and determin what you can aford and would be happy with. Go to a photo store in the area and handle some diffrent cameras to see how they feel in your hands and if the sales clerk is knowledgable they might even give you some advise.
Go to
Oct 22, 2011 19:42:43   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
Astro-Photography Anyone?
brucew29 wrote:
Kitty wrote:
Cheating on your request for my own personal work, but these are worth sharing. Both images are by John Dykes, who discovered Astro-Photography less than a year ago. His work is so good, the observatory in Carson City, Nevada displays him on their walls.


I wonder what type of camera, telescope, exposure, film or digital media ISO/ASA rating, that he used. There was no EXIF data attached.


There are many dedicated astronomy camera's out there as well, I own the Orion Parsec 8300C Color Astronomical Imaging Camera. Quite a few astro photogrephers use Canon camera's that have been modified for astronomical use. And quite a few use regular DSLR with t-ring and adapter for the telescope.
Go to
Oct 22, 2011 16:35:05   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
Astro-Photography Anyone?
Kitty wrote:
Cheating on your request for my own personal work, but these are worth sharing. Both images are by John Dykes, who discovered Astro-Photography less than a year ago. His work is so good, the observatory in Carson City, Nevada displays him on their walls.


Great pictures. The last one is the Pleiades cluster (M45) also known as the Seven Sisters. The stars are relatively young (in astronomical terms) and the blue wisp’s are caused by the remnant gas.
Go to
Oct 22, 2011 16:24:10   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
Minolta "X-370n"
chapjohn wrote:
Minolta MC and MD lenses with adaptor will work on Sony Alpha DSLR's. There are some people on here who use these lenses on their Alpha camera and produce great pictures.


Only work in manual focus mode.
Go to
Oct 22, 2011 09:57:15   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
Astro-Photography Anyone?
brucew29 wrote:
It has been many years since I have been involved in astrophotography but I would like to get back to it in the near future. Like my cameras, I will need to get my telescope out and dust it off! I have a 10" f/6.0 Newtonian reflecting telescope (dismantled and mirror stored in plastic storage box), and an 8" f/10 Dynamax Compound catadioptric Schmidt-Cassegrain. I will get the 8" Dynamax out since it is "More Portable" then the 10" Newtonian reflector... the mirror might need to be re-silvered anyway. Another fun thing planned to do if I ever get to it! It is on my wish list anyway!

I do astronomy and have a few dedicated cameras for that, however my attempts have been poor at astrophotography. Yahoo has a few good astronomy groups that posts astro pictures, you might want to check them out especialy the celestronCGEM group or the Mead DSI group.

Anyone out there with some good astro-photographs that you have personally took? If so, please post some of your work. I know that I may not get any/many responses since this type of photography is highly specialized.
It has been many years since I have been involved ... (show quote)
Go to
Oct 22, 2011 08:27:14   #
(Main Photography Discussion)
Minolta "X-370n"
snowbear wrote:
I read on another thread that Sony Alphas can use the older Minolta lenses. This might be something to look into, even trying one of your lenses on the Sony at the store if you don't anyone whom has a Alpha.


I shoot with Sony Alpha cameras and the old Minolta Auto Focus lenses work well on the Sony digital cameras, but not the manual lenses.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 328 329 330 331 332 333 next>>
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.