Grebel Posted July 27, 2011 Posted July 27, 2011 Does that mean you got a 450D, or Nikon equivalent ? I see the 600D is out now, so I am 2 generations back. Having said that, my 500D is capable of far, far more than what I get out of it right now. Yep, set shutter priority setting on the dial and drop the shutter speed, the camera will adjust the aperture to compensate. However, I have found that the water / background contrast is often just too high, and its never a great set-up. You need to play with spot metering, average metering, centre weighted metering, Automatic Exposure Bracketing and just plain manual experimenting, to get the best exposure. And doing all of those combinations whilst wife and nipper are keen to move on just is not do-able for me right now. HDR may also be a nice option to get good waterfalls, but thats also beyond my processing skills. Still water is much easier for me to get right.... Unfortunately not... I listened to the wrong people when I bought my camera. I went the Sony Alpha 350 DSLR route instead. At the time, the pixel count was higher and it had just been launched. The draw card was that it had IS built into the body which dropped the price of aftermarket lenses. If I had it to do over, I would have gone Canon. Having said that though, the Sony came out slightly ahead of it's Canon and Nikon equivalents as far as an entry level DSLR reviews on the majority of the websites went. There are more aftermarket options available for the Canons and Nikons as well. As a camera it still does what all the others do (except video). Besides it's not what's in your hands but rather what's attached to the hands that are holding it! I shoot without editing at the moment. My skill set doesn't stretch that far yet. I am barely able to shoot out of program mode
patham Posted July 28, 2011 Posted July 28, 2011 Unfortunately not... I listened to the wrong people when I bought my camera. I went the Sony Alpha 350 DSLR route instead. At the time, the pixel count was higher and it had just been launched. The draw card was that it had IS built into the body which dropped the price of aftermarket lenses. If I had it to do over, I would have gone Canon. Having said that though, the Sony came out slightly ahead of it's Canon and Nikon equivalents as far as an entry level DSLR reviews on the majority of the websites went. My personal view on Sony is that they see camera's as a consumer product line that fills a niche market, and contributes maybe 0.0001 % of bottom line. They did not develop it, they bought out Pentax or Minolta(can't remember), and rebranded them. A pure commercial venture, and if it starts to lose money, they will close it down or sell. They have no senior management passion for them. Nikon, Canon, are far more vested in camera's and optics. More development money, more R&D, and if their business slows, its more important to them. Thats why they churn out new models as fast as they can... I was burned once with my film SLR, Sigma started selling great SLR's, far better features than the equiv price point Canon. Now its a dinosaur, even my lenses are useless as they went for a proprietry mount. Just like Sony did. Thats why when I went digital , I bought to stay in the game. In your shoes, I would keep the Sony for as long as you are happy with it, and still developing (punny, I know) as a photog, as soon as you get upgraditis, or covet other lenses, take the plunge and change systems.
Grebel Posted July 28, 2011 Posted July 28, 2011 My personal view on Sony is that they see camera's as a consumer product line that fills a niche market, and contributes maybe 0.0001 % of bottom line. They did not develop it, they bought out Pentax or Minolta(can't remember), and rebranded them. A pure commercial venture, and if it starts to lose money, they will close it down or sell. They have no senior management passion for them. Nikon, Canon, are far more vested in camera's and optics. More development money, more R&D, and if their business slows, its more important to them. Thats why they churn out new models as fast as they can... I was burned once with my film SLR, Sigma started selling great SLR's, far better features than the equiv price point Canon. Now its a dinosaur, even my lenses are useless as they went for a proprietry mount. Just like Sony did. Thats why when I went digital , I bought to stay in the game. In your shoes, I would keep the Sony for as long as you are happy with it, and still developing (punny, I know) as a photog, as soon as you get upgraditis, or covet other lenses, take the plunge and change systems. Funny you should say that as I had made that exact decision a few months ago. I looked at selling my existing setup and taking the plunge, but considering my initial outlay and what I stood to lose, I figured it would be better to continue learning the basics on my Sony and upgrade to a Canon when the finances allowed. The first term I learned thanks to the Sony was the term proprietry mount. Lenses and flashes are Sony or Minolta AF only. It was a tough lesson to learn, but we learn from our mistakes. The good thing is that the techniques are all the same regardless of the equipment that you use. Like I said before, it isn't the equipment in your hand but rather the hands that hold the equipment. Almost time to shoot. The sun is out in Durban (and I am stuck at work...)!
BushGoblin Posted July 28, 2011 Posted July 28, 2011 saw this spotted eagle owl while in the berg a few weeks back.
Grebel Posted July 28, 2011 Posted July 28, 2011 saw this spotted eagle owl while in the berg a few weeks back. That is a nice shot!
patham Posted July 28, 2011 Posted July 28, 2011 saw this spotted eagle owl while in the berg a few weeks back. You are a lucky bast..rd just to see one, let alone take a pic of it. Pat yourself on the back.
gummibear Posted July 28, 2011 Posted July 28, 2011 Dangle,those pics are pretty sharp for hand held.What was the speed for the top pic?
Wyatt Earp Posted July 28, 2011 Author Posted July 28, 2011 Dangle,those pics are pretty sharp for hand held.What was the speed for the top pic? Hi Gummi, thanks.Just went on to Flickr to check. The top one . ISO 250 Aperture f7.1Speed 1/810 mm. focal length (Taken with my Tokina fisheye) The second one. ISO 250Aperture f25Speed 1/620 mm Focal length (Taken with Sigma 10-20 mm)
gummibear Posted July 28, 2011 Posted July 28, 2011 You have a damn steady hand.You should be a surgeon
Hairy Posted July 29, 2011 Posted July 29, 2011 Dangle. You won a cycle shop right? If so then if you apply the same eye for detail to your showroom and clients bicycles you must be rather successful. What I am saying is ... nice pics
CAAD4 Posted July 29, 2011 Posted July 29, 2011 Dangle. You won a cycle shop right? If so then if you apply the same eye for detail to your showroom and clients bicycles you must be rather successful. What I am saying is ... nice pics That's correct. He beat the previous owner to the line.... Beats winning a gold GT.....
Hairy Posted July 29, 2011 Posted July 29, 2011 That's correct. He beat the previous owner to the line.... Beats winning a gold GT..... .. damned early morning typo's .. need a couple more cups of coffee to get all the neurons switching properly!
Grebel Posted July 29, 2011 Posted July 29, 2011 My contribution Nice! I am lead to believe that lightning photography is a bit of a black art...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now