Well on another forum i frequent a member brought a good thread about taking pictures and asking how and what cameras to use. And examples of pictures taken by fellow members and the camera they used.

So here's my submission:

Following pictures were taken with my Konica Minolta Dimage X60 5MP + 12" Mini Tripod. (http://www.steves-digicams.com/2005_reviews/x60.html)

***Tips: Play w/ angles, try taking a picture from ground level (on the floor), use Photoshop only to adjust lighting (contrast/brightness), try not to use flash when in dark situations try using artificial lighting, get a tripod (no matter what size) steadiness counts, to get those light streaks at night dont use flash and have a steady shot, good practice is taking pictures of inanimate objects, that's all ive got in my photo snapping arsenal***

canon sd450...a tripod at times

angles are your friend







-JON

The best cameras to use are ones that allow you to change all you settings and allow different lenses to be used. I guess that reqires the user know what he is doing though.

Which equals to a SLR (Single-Lens Reflex) Camera or DSLR (Digital SLR) Camera. I mean those are great n all but very very costly. The lenses sometimes cost more than the camera body itself. It's not necessary for amateurs. I myself have done quite well with my snap n shoot small digicam. I do long for a DSLR, but i dont take enough pictures to justify spending that much money on something i wont use that often or use to it's full potential.

I know the feeling. A few of my lemses are way to much. I had to buy them to do the work, but I always think of the 914 I could have bought instead. Yes, you read that right

In a prior existance, I was a classically trained, published photographer. Now I only do it for fun and favors, and I have gotten a bit rusty.

Your gear does not a photographer make. The most expensive cameras and lenses won't help if you take boring pictures, don't have basic concepts of composition, speed, depth of field, etc. I have seen AMAZING pictures taken with $200 point and shoot digitals. Composition is way, WAY more important then the gear you use. Good gear does not really come into play until you know what you are doing - which is why just about intro to photography course still suggests the old Pentax K1000.

That said.
Here are some tips.
First tip: There are times when all of these tips should be ignored.

Never shoot on the Automatic mode. Never Ever! I tend to shoot by choosing my aperature, and let the camera choose the speed. This gives me control over depth of field (DoF). Your camera sucks at knowing what looks good.

Never center your subject. It creates a dead picture. This applies to cars, stones, boobies, whatever.

Never have the horizon (or any horizontal line) in the middle of your frame. It bisects the picture.

Always shoot at the slowest ASA the light will allow. For most cameras, thats 100, though some go to 50. A faster ASA will allow pictures to be taken in darker places, but at the expense of noise.

Be mindful of shadows, especially outside. They can be killers.

On composition...
You subject should be the subject and take up most of the frame. Zoom in or walk closer.

Your subject should be in focus. Use your DoF or other composition tricks to lead into the subject.

Don't over crop. Highly subjective, but when its over done, its over done.

Be mindful of what is around you. I have had hundreds of pictures ruined by something in the frame I had not seen when taking the picture.

Finally, when a pro goes out, he takes a LOT of pics. Roughly, for every 36 pictures taken, 1 or 2 are going to be keepers, the rest are garbage.


Zach

I miss my old K1000 Very good tips and pointers.

I have my degree in commercial photography, and when some guy comes up to me while I'm shooting says "Oh, the D200. I have one of those." I wonder why. If people are going to buy a digital SLR they need to know what all the functions are. Why buy a camera that has over 1000 options when you only know 1? I still like to use medium and lagre format cameras, but they are more of a pain to carry when you have big jobs that require you to move around alot.

Sometimes point and shoot cams will give you a good shot but they often agravated me. You have to wait for them to turn on and then focus and then trip the shutter. Too much waiting for my taste. I had to move up to a DSLR. At first I got a D50 then when I talked my way into shooting for Mazdasport Mag. I got a used Nikon D1H for $500. Super fast (5 frames per second) super fast start up and no waiting for the shutter to trip and excellent quality.
I shot the Grand Prix of Houston and got some awesome shots with $100 lenses. Equipment isn't everything but if you want to have consistently good shots, buy good equipment. And yeah angles are your friend!
Here are some shots of the race.

Nice work and nice pick up. I have a D1H as well, and they are a great camera. I was a cannon guy before that camera, but I have seen the error in my ways.

I really like the King Taco pic.

Oh yeah, buy a lot of the memory cards and shoot your ass off. You can always delete pics. Try different apertures on the same subject and learn how to include and exclude the background/foreground. That alone will help catapult you into taking contest winning photos. I suck at composition but I'm getting better. Angles can't be improved with post processing but you can compose a bit with cropping in PS. Thanks Blood on the comments. More pics with Porsche content.

Again, very nice work.

It is true that shooting hundreds of pics does help to get that one amazing picture, but you need to learn in camera cropping and composition. Some of the shots I have to take you only get one chance, and you have to get that shot. It's a little more tricky working with large format cameras. You can learn a lot from shooting with medium or large format cameras, but if you really want to learn go to your local used camera store and buy a Pentax K1000. Learn all the functions of the camera. Then get your digital camera and start taking 100s of pictures or random stuff until you pictures of regular shit looks awsome without any photoshop.

Oh, when you take pictures to sell stuff... the pics should be terrible as to show that you didn't doctor anything. I am always hesitant to buy piture perfect stuff from people online as I know how easy it is to make something look perfect that is not.

Your right Blood. I learned on an old Mamiya 500TL 35mm. My dad had the larger format stuff and even today high end pro shoots are done with large format cameras. The more time you take setting up a great shot (composing) the better your work will be.
I think you have the eye for photography D-lo, step up and buy a used DSLR.

Good advice here. Good info from Vacca as well. Equipment doesn't matter so much, it's the learning process and knowledge that matters.
I have gotten some fantastic images from the ol' manual-everything 35mm and some attentive darkroom work. Luckily now I have some medium and large format cameras to play with too.
I think digital has really shunned the artistic side of photography. It is great for the point and shooters, and can provide great results with a little know how. Manual mode! Learning the functions of the camera is very important.

This has already been mentioned, but a piece of advice I was given by my cousin who is a professional photographer, "If you want to be known as a good photographer, make good use of the waste basket." Don't let anyone see your bad pictures, and there will be plenty of those. I never got good at it.

first of all -you got some fine pics there - and photography is an expensive hobby.
equipment matters - or else all pros would just use a point and shoot. i used a canon 1dII for years to shoot sports, from high school to olympic level - day and night - and it was much better than my D60 and better than my 1d. skills too are important and will come with time. being able to control DOF and being able to use high iso and having great af system - really hep - as does having lots of FPS.
jim

My mentor told me once

You can shoot 30 rolls or 3 rolls and at the end of the day you will still be lucky to have had one opportunity for a truly great shot.

Take your time, look at your surroundings and anticipate where that one great shot might present itself. Its all in where you place yourself WITHIN the action.

Great photographers are not bystandards.

You don't take good photos, you make good photos.

The most important piece of advice that I can give is to USE YOUR FEET!!!

Walk to where the photograph is. Get closer. Get a better angle. Move to get a better background. Use light to your advantage.


The most common "fault" in photos is failure to pay attention to the background.


Zach has some good advice... in particular he refers to the "rule of thirds".

http://digital-photography-school.com/blog/rule-of-thirds/

Thanks! But $$$ I should've asked Santa for one this year!

This is great advice too. I've had some awesome shots with crap in the background that ruined the shot. Also if you do go DLSR you can check your shot and look for items that you don't want in your shot.

ok kids, enough talk.
lets see some of your best work.

Some of my stuff (I'm totally whoring right now, and I don't even care).

I don't have a lot of pics of cars that arn't just snapshots... So...


Fire dancer. This was a tough shot. ASA kicked all the way up to 1600, and a slowish time setting - 30-45.







^^^That is probably one of my favorite pics taken in recent history.




You don't always need funky angles. At least for my tastes, funky angles look better for ricer cars, and classics tend to look better classically framed. Chris' car is also fuching amazing, which helps.


One of my favorite all time shots.

Okay, I'm done.

Zach

Damn, you're good Zach. I have a fast eye and some reflexes for action but the artful shots are my weakness.

Thanks
My weakness is panning action. I never get to practice it, and when I do, it seems I'm more luck with it then skill, or the subject is too far away and I simply don't have enough lens to get in tight.

I wish I had some of my good stuff digitized. I used to put hours upon hours into darkroom work, but I have not had the time to do that in well over a decade.

Zach

Hmm...any of you guys got any Fish Eye Lense shots? Those are always interesting shots.

Very nice work Zach

Your panning would get much better if you used a new digital. My D200 locks on a subject and will keep it in focus. I like your timed shot. I like to do night shots, but now that I have a kid I haven't been able to.

the focus on my D200 sucks! I can't get the focus lock to stay on anything... in fact i'm manually focusing most of the time nowadays. Probably dont know how to use it right as i grew up with manual focus.

(Points for anyone who can name the track)

Alright... Brer asked for some. Most of my photos are on my Mac, but here are a few that I have on this computer. My wife... My son... my nephew... the forth of July... and a fun nightime pic.

You need to program it to work the best. Look in the million page manual that came with it and it tells you have to st up the tracking.

I am hoping for a Nikon D40X for Christmas. Nice camera for a beginner and for $600.

These guys have good prices and actually have a brick and motar store

http://www.butterflyphoto.com/process/Filt...000/1004/-1/1/A

That's a good price on the kit. Good starter camera too. I would suggest you try to get a book on light meter and apature settings. It will help you to understand how to create a dramatic depth of field.

Oh, and for those who are beginners. If you are getting an SLR for family pics you should invest in a good 80mm lens. That is the idea lens for portraits. If you buy a good lens it will have a low F stop too.

Speaking of 80mm lens... if you happen into a D200 which accepts earlier nikon manual focus lenses the bog standard manual focus 50mm lens becomes nearly an 80mm when stuck on it (due to the DX format). So pick up a late 80's 50mm f1.2 for a couple hundy and you'll be in love.

Good portraits are better with manual focus anyway, its kinda hot.

Manual focus is the primary reason to buy the D200. otherwise I would have had the D70/D80.

I would not be surprised if my Canon 350D had a similar feature. I probably know about 1/2 of the stuff it can do. When I was shooting more sports, I was pretty good a panning the old fashioned way. I'm just way rusty, and don't get a lot of chances to practice the technique.



The Canon have the same 1.6 form factor. I keep 35mm prime lens on hand for portraits and snap-shots - actually, that is what I use for my every day lens. 35mm becomes a 50mm lens on most of the non-pro DSLRs, and a 50mm lens is my favorite lens hands down. Fast, light, small, and cheap even with good glass.

A 50mm lens (80mm with the 1.6 multiplier) is too much zoom for my taste, unless you are taking your picture from across the room. If my 50mm prime was not a maco lens, I'd probably sell it. I almost never use it.

While a lot of guys like the 1.6 multiplier, I really hate it. However, getting a DSLR that does not have it is much more money then I have to spend, and my XT does all that I need it to be able to do.

Zach

I agree. I hate the 1.6 multiplier, but what are you gunna do? I don't so much as like that you have to be so far away with the 80mm, but it is a very flatering lens. All of the shots above that are of people are with a 50mm, and it works well.

Yes, your Cannon has it, but like I said.. You need to program it properly. It takes a lot of time and patence.

Where's this??

........ b

Brokeback? JK looks like Colorado.

Think WCC

...b

Oh no, you've opened a real can of worms!

Really, you need two cameras. A pocket point-and-shoot that you can just take anywhere. If you're using an iPhone, then you've got that built in already. Take a look at the photos people are getting with iPhones:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/takenwithiphone/pool/

If that doesn't suffice, or you find yourself being limited by your camera's feature set, then you should probably consider diving into the DSLR market. If you're on a super tight budget (under $500), then you may want to looking into buying a used Nikon D70 or a Canon Digital Rebel (depending on your preference). You can find them on Craigslist.org with a lens in great condition for $400 +/- if you just have a little patience. You don't want to end up with something that's been abused or stolen. Photographers are habitual upgraders, so there's a lot of great used gear out there.

If you've got more cash burning a hole in your pocket, then you're coming into this world of digital SLRs at a fantastic time. Both Nikon (my preference) and Canon (really just as good) have some great entry level and semi-pro DSLRs that are totally fantastic and can be had at what I think are reasonable prices. These are the Porsches 914s of the Camera world, so there may be a little learning curve with some models (though some are suprisingly automatic).

Off the top of my head, here's what I recommend. I'm sticking with Nikon and Canon, as though are the only DSLRs I really know anything about:

- Nikon D40X: Nikon's Entry Level DSLR, 10.2 Megapixels, you have to use Nikon DX Lenses if you want auto-focus. I've found new, non-graymarket (don't buy graymarket!) kits (body, lens, memory) for $600.

- Nkon D80: Nikon's next step up from the D40X. Also 10.2 MegaPixels, but more features and you have more lens choices. Better performance all round. Kits (body, lens, memory) for around $1k

- Canon Digial Rebel XTi: 10.1 MegaPixels, better low light performance than the entry level Nikons. My gripe is that they're made of plastic, so they feel a little toy-like to me. I'm also not a big fan of Canon's entry-level lenses for the same reasons. However, this camera takes awesome photos and it's priced around the same as the Nikon D40X

- Canon EOS 40D: New, 10 MegaPixel, Semi-Pro for a great price (around $1500 in kit form). I don't know a whole lot about it, but I'm sure it's awesome.

- Nikon D300: Nikon's new 12.3 MegaPixel camera. Better low light performance than the D200, huge LCD on the back with Live View and 640 x 480 resolution, semi-pro, good for studio and field work. You'll be out 2k smackaroos for a kit.

Nikon and Canon have also both released new top of the line, pro cameras. But if you're that serious about photography, then you already new that. Just the bodies alone will set you back over $5,000 and because they're full frame, you'll probably need to replace your lenses as well to get the full benifits that each has to offer.

If that's still not good enough, then you can go spend $40k on a nice 40 MegaPixel medium format Hasselblad digial camera. All the cool kids have those.

I have to also recommend that you invest in a nice shoe-mount flash if you plan on doing any indoor, low light photography. Being able to bounce light off of the ceiling or the wall is a million times more natural looking than firing straight at the subject. The results are the difference between a mug shot and... um, something nice to look at.

I've been shooting with a D200 for the past six months or so, and I'm in love. The D300 would be on my wish list, but it's not a big enough of a step up, and then next step up would set me out of pocket at least $5k (not including glass). I shoot with a 18 - 70 mm lens most of the time, but prefer the image quality of my 50mm f/1.8 prime lens. It's cheap, shoots super fast and is great in low light. You can also get some pretty extreme DOF effects with it as well. I have a lousy 70 - 300 for the long shots, but it's not very sharp. I've borrowed macro lenses and I can't get enough. Currently looking at the Sigma 150mm macro lens and it will probably be my next big purchase.

I have lots of favs, but I don't want to use up too much space here.

Randy... did you shoot most of those with your 50mm?

.....b

Top 3, Sylvie's portrait (the white face), and the smoke, were all done with the 50 f/1.8. That top photo of Scott's 914 at Ledson Winery here in Sonoma County would have been a lot better had I shot it at f/7 or thereabouts. I had it set to something like f/2 for some of the other shots I had been taking earlier and blanked out about changing it for that shot. I think I was trying to soak in more light from my SB-600 flash (mounted on a tripod to the left of the shot), but I should have just used a higher ISO setting. Boo.

Nice shot Brer. Before I bought the 50 f/1.8, I used my friends old 50 f/1.4 (manual focus) on my D200. You're right, it's wonderful. However, I suck at nailing focus manually and ended up with a bunch of soft shots. With all the focus zones the D200 offers, it's hard to see why focusing manually would really be better in most cases.

manual focus isn't better for most. I bought a KATZEYE focus screen for my camera to assist with that. Its part of my process and I cant get away from it without feeling out of touch.

Another good tip for a super nice camera would be the Nikon D2H . Only 4.1 Megapixel but thats great for most amatuer shooters. Dont think it wont print nice large prints as it will 12x16 no problem. It will capture a nicer image than my D200 alot of people think, CMOS I think?? Anyway, its a professional level camera that is only slightly outdated now, but still an AWESOME rig for the money. I have had to resist buying one myself.

(fix car, dont need camera)

I don't think I'd be happy with just 4 MP at this point. 10 gives you such terrific cropping and printing power. It's also good to have those extra pixels when doing certain image sharpening techniques.

I've had perverted thoughts of selling the 914 for the new Nikon D3:
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikond3/

It's 12 MP if you use the good lenses and just 5 MP if you use DX lenses. I can't justify making the leap as I don't feel I've hit any real limits with the D200 yet. I think my only complaint is with the amount of noise you get in photos when using higher ISO settings. The D3 doesn't have that problem... One can dream a little, right?

Elsa Case sits and weeps as a lifetime of posessions are hauled away by a demolition crew hired by the city, thursday. Case's home was in violation of city fire codes which forced her eviction.
Click to view attachment


Jerry Rice Jr. doesn't live in his father's shaddow. He is marching to the beat of his own drum. Even though Rice Sr. can bee seen at most of his son's footall games Jerry Jr. says "My dad loves to come watch me play basketball"
Click to view attachment


San Mateo quarterback Nate Davidson had a 90-yard touchdown run in his 129-yard rushing performance against Capuchino.
Click to view attachment

Oracle complex 11/29/07
14mm F3.5 1/2 sec. ISO-100 +3 step

Click to view attachment


Know your camera, know your subject matter and shoot, shoot, shoot....

Nothing beats practise...... Other than a bit of luck.

All shots were taken with the Olympus E-Volt 410

Sure wish I had the funds for a D3. Not yet but maybe next year. I started saving for one a couple of months ago. If saving goes the same as it has for the past couple of months I will have the camera by, let's say...... 2023.... Yikes

OK, last one.

Click to view attachment

here are some of my photos:


Click to view attachment

Before digital, you used to be able to spend $500-$1000 to get a very nice Nikon (or other) SLR that would last you a lifetime. Now you spend $3000 for a professional DLSR and it's considered outdated in a couple of years. Useful life of a good camera has gone from 30 years down to 5 years.

Its a joke isn't it. but the camera companies are loving it.


My normal response to someone asking me what camera to buy would be to get an old 35mm and a home BW darkroom setup, but even that advice is kinda unrealistic considering the flexibility and instant nature of digital shooting and storage.

That said, the only photographers I know that are making bucks today still shoot film.


-Koozy your first two pics are exceptionally human. very nice.

Thank you. For film I use a Minolta 7000i and a Minolta 400si. Both are very capable and nice cameras. I get over a dozen photos published every week and the E-Volt has stepped up to the plate. If I were to suggest buying an entry level DSLR with pro capabilities, the E-Volt would be my pic. If you wanted to step up but still not break the bank I would go with the E-3. Fastest, lightest camera out there for the price point.