Old 08-23-2007, 01:19 AM   #26
Carl Becker
Senior Member
 
Carl Becker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,218
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Limits
Thanks Carl,
These are about 1/3 the price of a 30D, and I can still use my Speedlight.
The G7 looks like it would fit in a (big) pocket.
I think the G9 is similar in size. It also shoots in RAW, and I don't think the G7 does.
Carl Becker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 05:21 AM   #27
John Fladung
JohnFladung.net
 
John Fladung's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Saint Paul, MN
Posts: 785
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl Becker
I think the G9 is similar in size. It also shoots in RAW, and I don't think the G7 does.
Unless you are going to rotate, crop, or do any sort of post processing what-so-ever on the photos it's pointless to shoot in RAW format. Shooting in RAW format only to upload pictures straight from the camera would not make any sense.
John Fladung is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 05:25 AM   #28
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog
I need a backpack-style camera bag, but right now still only have the big, somewhat bulky camera bag that can be held by hand or worn over the shoulder.
Joe, I'd like to recommend the Tamrac Velocity 9 bag:



I use this bag about 95% of the time...it goes with me EVERYWHERE (when I go hiking, I have a bigger Tamrac camera backpack to carry more non-camera stuff). You can wear it over either shoulder and it's very comfortable to wear for long periods of time (as mentioned earlier, I walked around Chicago for about 8 hours with it). It's nice because you can easily spin it around to the front of you get your camera and lenses out. It fits my 100-400, 17-40 and 50mm 1.4 and still has room for more. It also has a nice zipper front pocket for storing filters, batteries, cards, etc. No, I do not work for Tamrac.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 06:29 AM   #29
Switched out
Senior Member
 
Switched out's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 395
Default

Canon's G9 should be a nice camera for those situations where you don't want to lug around a large camera but want some control over settings and such stuff. I have a little PAS Nikon E3100 that I carry with me most of the time. It's great for those unexpected moment snaps but when it comes down to doing some real work it just does not cut it.

When I comes to carting all my other camera gear around I have a Tamrac Adventure 9 back pack. It's my I have to take everything with me and live of the land back pack. It's has a some what over padded section for the camera gear and laptop plus it has a small compartment for all my other important stuff like lunch. It's very comfortable to wear even when fully loaded with laptop and camera gear.



Check out the Tamrac site for more.


Christine.

Switched out is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 06:48 AM   #30
PLEzero
Senior Member
 
PLEzero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pittsburgh,PA
Posts: 675
Default

I will throw a recommendation out there as well for a camera backpack.

I have a Lowepro Mini Trekker AW which has worked out great for me. There is enough room for 2 bodies and a verity of lenses. There is also another version on this backpack which is not the AW version and is much cheaper. I purchased mine from B&H.
__________________
Brad Morocco
Candyland, PA
My Flickr Photos
My RP.net Photos
PLEzero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 07:02 AM   #31
Mgoldman
Senior Member
 
Mgoldman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,641
Default

I'll recomend a camera bag (and almost anything) from Amvona on E-bay via aution. I got a great backpack for $16.00 (and $12.00 shipping). Shipping is generally very high but the high bid is usually ridiculously low. Check them out. When I went to a camera store a similar backpack was about a hundred bucks!

/Mitch
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 08:56 AM   #32
alan-crotty
Senior Member
 
alan-crotty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ashford Kent England
Posts: 349
Default Point and Shoot no high ISO

Janet asked

PS. Any reason that the PAS has a lower ASA available than either of the SLR's?
__________________
Janet


Hi Janet,

The reason is that the PAS cameras usually have much smaller sensors than SLRs. I think you 350D has a sensor about 23mmx16mm, many point and shoots have a sensor size of 9mmx 6mm or less.

So with the same number of pixels packed into a smaller area the pixels have to be smaller than those on a DSLR (to make the same Mega pixels). Using smaller pixels means the signal from them need more amplification of the the signal to make the image file, more amplification means more noise (grain?).

When you turn up the ISO on your DSLR you are just increasing the amplification of the pixel signal., same with a PAS.

Its just that your DSLR has a larger per pixel than a PAS, so less amplification for a given ISO is needed.

So PAS makers limit the ISO to a figure that gives acceptable noise.

Alan
alan-crotty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 09:24 AM   #33
Mike B.
Banned
 
Mike B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,343
Default

I just throw my camera bag into my backpack.
Mike B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 10:45 AM   #34
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Janet asked

PS. Any reason that the PAS has a lower ASA available than either of the SLR's?
__________________
I think Janet's question is the opposite one. Why does a P/S go down to 50 when DSLRs don't go below 100? Well, if not hers, then it's mine!

Don't know the answer!
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 02:24 PM   #35
alan-crotty
Senior Member
 
alan-crotty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ashford Kent England
Posts: 349
Default I think Janet asked?

Hi,

My DSLR has 50 ISO, sorry I don't know why PAS and many DSLR do not have 50 ISO.

I will do some research and see what I can find.

Alan don't.

Last edited by alan-crotty; 08-23-2007 at 02:27 PM. Reason: spelling
alan-crotty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 03:53 PM   #36
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Switched out

When I comes to carting all my other camera gear around I have a Tamrac Adventure 9 back pack. It's my I have to take everything with me and live of the land back pack.
That's my "other" bag, Christine. That one comes along with me on the serious hikes, as it's a VERY comfortable bag to carry and the extra storage space is good for food or clothing. I ended up going with the camo one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike B.
I just throw my camera bag into my backpack.
Well, how do you keep it from laying on its side??

Last edited by JimThias; 08-23-2007 at 03:55 PM.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 04:09 PM   #37
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Quote:
Well, how do you keep it from laying on its side??
Ha ha ha ha!!!
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 06:57 PM   #38
Mike B.
Banned
 
Mike B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias
Well, how do you keep it from laying on its side??
I just carry my backpack sideways. I did get quite worried when I was taking this photo though.
Image ©
PhotoID:
Photograph ©
Mike B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 06:57 PM   #39
WembYard
Senior Member
 
WembYard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Bedfordshire, UK
Posts: 646
Default

Thanks for the answers Alan and Janusz.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC
I think Janet's question is the opposite one. Why does a P/S go down to 50 when DSLRs don't go below 100? Well, if not hers, then it's mine!
Yes, that is what I meant. 50ASA (and 100ASA) on the A95 gives some very good results, but anything higher than that - forget it (at least for RP type quality).
WembYard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 08:07 PM   #40
Carl Becker
Senior Member
 
Carl Becker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,218
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Switched out
Canon's G9 should be a nice camera for those situations where you don't want to lug around a large camera but want some control over settings and such stuff.
You pretty much quoted Canon there on their motive about releasing the new SX100. They wanted it to be completely compact and range from fully automatic to fully manual shooting. One thing I find interesting (and rather unusual) about it is that there is no viewfinder.



Not that I'm a big fan of viewfinders, anyway...
Carl Becker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 08:50 PM   #41
ken45
LA&SL Fanatic
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 700
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl Becker
You pretty much quoted Canon there on their motive about releasing the new SX100. They wanted it to be completely compact and range from fully automatic to fully manual shooting. One thing I find interesting (and rather unusual) about it is that there is no viewfinder.



Not that I'm a big fan of viewfinders, anyway...
It was only a matter of time. I figure it's only a few years until they make a sensor in which the pixels detect the color and intensity of the light hitting it with such speed and accuracy that you no longer need shutter speeds and apertures. You would literally just point the camera (can you call it a camera without shutters and all that?!?!) at the scene, hit the button, and it would be instantly recorded. Just think, no tripods needed for night shots! But maybe I'm getting a bit sci-fi here...
__________________
My Railpictures Shots http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=2561
ken45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 10:02 PM   #42
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ken45
It was only a matter of time. I figure it's only a few years until they make a sensor in which the pixels detect the color and intensity of the light hitting it with such speed and accuracy that you no longer need shutter speeds and apertures. You would literally just point the camera (can you call it a camera without shutters and all that?!?!) at the scene, hit the button, and it would be instantly recorded. Just think, no tripods needed for night shots! But maybe I'm getting a bit sci-fi here...
You've described the Auto setting, been around for years and years.
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 10:08 PM   #43
Carl Becker
Senior Member
 
Carl Becker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,218
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC
You've described the Auto setting.
My favorite.
Carl Becker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 10:30 PM   #44
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike B.
I just carry my backpack sideways. I did get quite worried when I was taking this photo though.
Image ©
PhotoID:
Photograph ©
Nice shot, Mike. The reflection on the rail really makes this shot stand out.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2007, 03:29 AM   #45
quiksmith10
Senior Member
 
quiksmith10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Norman, OK / Frederick, MD
Posts: 269
Send a message via AIM to quiksmith10
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike B.
I just carry my backpack sideways. I did get quite worried when I was taking this photo though. **PHOTO**
COUGH, COUGH .... trying to up your view count .... COUGH, COUGH

Just kidding with you Mike. As you saw from my comment, nice shot.
__________________
Brandon Smith

Click here to view my photos at Railpictures.net!

Photography Portfolio: http://www.flickr.com/photos/53118039@N05/
quiksmith10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2007, 04:11 AM   #46
chico
Member
 
chico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Madcity, WI.
Posts: 40
Default dSLR or Point and Shoot?

Both should be in your kit. I like the p&s for those times when I want to be unobstrusive with a camera. Haul out the 20D and big lens in a crowd and they think you're some kind of pro and they instinctively clam up. On the other hand, say, on a crowded platform, you could pull out the P&S and fire away at scenes of people and they wouldn't think much of it. Just another goofy tourist!
chico is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2007, 07:36 AM   #47
Mike B.
Banned
 
Mike B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by quiksmith10
COUGH, COUGH .... trying to up your view count .... COUGH, COUGH
View count really isn't that important to me. I would be a little miffed if it only got 10 views, but I couldn't care less if it got 300 or 1000 views. Of course the more views the better, but it's not that important. After all, look at my most viewed photo. It's one of my least favorites that I have on here.

My motivation for posting this photo was to prove to those people who think I only shoot in sunny weather that I don't shoot exclusively in sun. I'll always take full sun over clouds or rain, but just because it isn't sunny doesn't mean my camera gets put away. Plus, I realized that I only had sunny shots on here prior to this one.

Thanks for the comment. The photo has gotten a much better reaction than I thought it would. I wasn't even sure if it would get accepted due to IQ.
Mike B. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2007, 07:44 AM   #48
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,895
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl Becker
My favorite.
Carl;

Auto won't always be your favorite setting as you grow more serious about photography. It shouldn't be anyway. Who do you think is smarter? You, with a brain in your head, or that little camera in your hand that is plastic and moving parts?

I used to shoot on full auto because I was frightened to do anything on manual after listening to "real photographers" talk about how hard it was, blah, blah, blah. A lot of photographers, esp. in pre-digital days, talked like this to mke themselves sound more important. If a book came out and said, "Photography is easy. Almost anyone can do it." It probably wouldn't sell a lot of copies.

Once you start shooting in manual, you will be amazed at the difference it makes and will wonder what ever made you think Auto was so great to begin with. At least, I do.


Joe
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2007, 12:54 PM   #49
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog

Once you start shooting in manual, you will be amazed at the difference it makes and will wonder what ever made you think Auto was so great to begin with. At least, I do.
And you'll also be amazed at how EASY it is. Simply pick your aperture, stick with it and all you have to do is adjust the shutter speed to get the proper lighting. Now really...how hard can THAT be?? It sure beats the camera in auto setting getting confused when the headlight of a train throws off the exposure, or it picks a dark part of the train and the next thing you know it's throwing an 800 iso picture at you or a slow shutter speed. BAH!
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2007, 02:24 PM   #50
ken45
LA&SL Fanatic
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 700
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC
You've described the Auto setting, been around for years and years.
No I didn't, read the post again. I was describing a new kind of camera which doesn't use shutter speed, aperture, and ISO to control exposure, it simply reproduces each scene almost instantaneously by recording the color and intensity of light hitting each pixel as opposed to having light "burn itself in" like with film or current digital technology. It would be of little use to the experienced photographer who like to vary exposure to get different effects, but would be great for beginners.
__________________
My Railpictures Shots http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=2561

Last edited by ken45; 08-24-2007 at 04:03 PM.
ken45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.