24th January 2005, 11:19 AM
The UOB account doesnt give u membership.
Originally Posted by Venom81
But with the UOB account, u can apply for a UOB debit VISA mini card (free, and no salary req, even students can apply)
Which will allow u to take courses at member's price.
But that doesnt make u a PSS member though.
The offer stands as long as PSS and UOB doesnt cancel the agreement.
24th January 2005, 11:35 AM
Originally Posted by pangxie
The "problem" with prosumer digicams or even Canon A95
Although they offer MANUAL settings, the choice of aperature and shutter speeds is "limited"
They might only have 6-8 "steps"/choices btw the min and max shutter speed or aperature values.
For a budget of less than $1000.
I think u shld try a lower end Film SLR, possibly a Nikon F75 or a 2nd hand F80 or Canon's EOS 300 or 300V (not 300D) depending on which one u intend to follow.
Depend on ur choice, the cost of camera will be 500-600 range.
The 50mm will be $180 i think
Though I think a Tamron 28-200mm lens will be great for u, since its a 1 lens that covers the wide to tele.
Its ard $300+, below $400 i think (havent been keeping up with latest prices)
So the SLR and the 28-200mm will be less than 1k
save the rest of the money for ur Battery, (CR123 or CR2) and ur films.
Do not rush to buy an external flash so soon, since the built in flash is good for 3-4m, and if u take shots in the day (outdoors), most of the time u dont need a flash.
Getting into a FM2 at the start of photography, (depending on the user..) might be too steep a learning curve.
A F75/80 can be set to full manual if needed.
24th January 2005, 12:01 PM
Originally Posted by pangxie
IMHO, the best way for a newbie to learn photography is to go straight to DIGITAL. Instant review is an incredibly useful tool for learning about what went wrong (or right) about your shot. The ability to quickly download your shots, look at the exif data, play around with the crop tool will allow you to quickly grasp the basics of shutter speed/aperture/ISO and composition.
My personal experience? I had my Dad's Nikon F601 for more than a decade, and whilst I was interested in taking PICTURES, I was never really thrilled about photography, 'coz it was just too difficult to find out what I had done wrong with my shots. By the time I had the prints, I had totally forgotten what I had done. Shooting film, you need to be very disciplined to take down notes about what shutter speed you used, aperture size etc. for each and every shot. Who wants to be doing that when you are travelling on a nice vacation to Rome or Hawaii? I just want to shoot!
The stories about learning to use your eye, and how film makes you disciplined, well, you need to consider that some of the guys who are posting here are pretty seasoned and accomplished photographers. They are the passionate ones who grew up with film and were disciplined enough to make their notes. Their only experience is shooting film first then transitioning to digital, if I were them, I'd sing the same tune, "Go film young man, it will make you such a fine photographer that digital will be a cinch." How about the other 80% of film users who have just thrown up their hands in despair and totally given up on photography?
Since I have gotten my DSLR a year ago, I haven't looked back. To my eye, (and my wife's ) my photography has improved leaps and bounds, especially the technical side. I've learned 10 times more in one year than the last 10 years put together. Sure, when you start off, you will take gazillions of shots and throw away 99%. You will chimp after every shot. Once you find your feet, your style will become more 'film-like', i.e. take less and chimp infrequently.
Its not that expensive these days, and if you are into quality lenses, that's where the bulk of the cost can be anyway. A used 300D can be had for less than 1K (maybe even less after Feb if Canon launch a replacement), and a D70 for a few hundred more. If you really want to learn with film, printing costs can kill (think at least hundreds of dollars).
Digital is the way to go. Eventually if you like, you can go back to film and challenge yourself. Shooting film can make you a better digital photographer, but if you just starting out, the reverse applies as well.
24th January 2005, 12:15 PM
Originally Posted by dkw
Buying a used 300D is quite a risky thing. Dun u tink so?
24th January 2005, 01:10 PM
Not really, can buy mine . I know your opinion of that camera, but seriously, mine has been used and *abused*, minus 10 Celsius in DC, cold wet waterfall spray in Germany, tropical forest and what not, seems none the worse for the wear. Btw, not gaffered....... Even though I'm going on to another camera, the 300D I will never sell. Smallish, light, great functionality (especially with the hack) and outstanding image quality, perfect backup and walkabout cam.
Originally Posted by XXX Boy
24th January 2005, 01:15 PM
Originally Posted by dkw
Do not agree with some of your points. Here we have a guy who claim to be passionate in photography, or having the passion to get into photography. using Film will be a test whether he likes photography, or just thinking that "yeah I want to be an artistic photographer" etc.
I would think that both film and digital are as good. Ever since digital cameras become affordable, SLR seems more like an electronic stuff to me. It is an "in" thing to have a digital SLR, more so for a digital camera. After I read your experience in using film and digital, my initial thoughts of you is that you find digital pictures more interesting than film photography, and easy to learn.
24th January 2005, 01:28 PM
I'm actually a pragmatic type of guy, whatever is the best tool for the job, I will use it. I really do like to take PICTURES, you know, of the wifey, baby, landscapes, architecture, macros. I'm not a particularly good photographer but I can get by. When I shot film, I'd be using 20-30 rolls in a week if on vacation, so I was fairly serious about what I did. Never learnt very much 'coz I was really more interested in looking at the scenery than sticking my nose in a notebook, so I bracketed extensively (somewhat like digital style but a lot more expensive ).
Originally Posted by theITguy
To me DSLR was a lifesaver (for my wallet!) and fired up my interest in photography, simply because I find it the simplest and most effective tool for image capture, and for learning photography.
I'm not trying to sway film users from their chosen medium, I respect that choice. I'm only giving advice here that, if I were a newbie all over again, I sincerely feel I would want to hear.
25th January 2005, 01:13 AM
25th January 2005, 03:20 PM
I have set here for sell:
Nikon FM2 Chrome w/ MD12
Nikkor 55mm macro
Price negotiable. Good condition. I can throw in a cam bag.
Used items OK?
Call me at 90426670
25th January 2005, 08:01 PM
Think there is someone selling a 2nd hand SLR camera + Lens (selling for 200) in the Buy & Sell Forum.
25th January 2005, 10:19 PM
Yes yes yes, DSLR is such a wonder thing.
Originally Posted by dkw
But Please please please READ the thread starter's post before advicing.
He has only $1,000 to spend.
(Even a 2nd hand DSLR, that will only be enough for a mere body, w/o CF and other important things like lenses...etc)
If he had $2,000, the advice would have been different.
If he had $10,000, the advice would have been again...different.
I give suggestion Based on the Thread starter's Budget and his level of interest in the subject...etc
Since his level of interest is pretty keen, I dont think a Sub-$1000 level digital camera (which cant get u prosumer grade), will be a good learn tool
This is not a "SHOOT SHOOT SHOOT" and "Oops Oops Oops" Way of Learning.
IF You intend to go ROME and blast blast to "Learn photography"
My advice is get an IXUS and save the time.
Learn photography involve a LOT OF READING UP BEFORE you EVEN LOAD in the 1st Roll of Film and Start Shooting away.
I was as paranoid, and fearful of "how my shots will turn out" WHEN I first used a FM2, Especially since I dont have my "Autofocus", "TTL Flash", "Tv-Mode, Av-Mode..etc" to guide me along.
Heck, I even forgot to wind the film advance after each shot.
If the thread starter Truely is interested to learn.
A course/a good book/a mentor is a good starter to AVOID becoming just another many "SHOOT SHOOT SHOOT" and "Delete delete delete" shooter.
I didnt take a course, but I did have a mentor to guide me and point out my mistakes instead of letting me blindly shoot another 7,000 shots w/o KNOWING where I did wrong.
"Never learnt very much 'coz I was really more interested in looking at the scenery "
It explains why u perfer to bracket your shots and shoot a lot, to pick good ones out of the many bad ones.
There is a difference in "Liking to TAKE pictures" and "Like photography"
25th January 2005, 11:51 PM
Winston, I totally agree wif ya! I had seen too much 'shoot shoot shoot' 'preview preview preview' 'delete delete delete' photographers...
Originally Posted by Winston
Worse still, some dun even know the basics of photography!
25th January 2005, 11:55 PM
Originally Posted by tommon
OMG, FM2? Maybe I want to collect one of those as my 2nd SLR
26th January 2005, 12:10 AM
Originally Posted by pangxie
IMHO, get a dslr but shoot as if you are using film. Only download and preview image on your PC at home. (still faster than developing film).
Using DSLR can let instructor preview your shots on the spot (through Laptop) or even shoot with you and see the difference.
Film camera had a longer learning curve and have to factor in the labs for your developing time.
BTW, I prefer shooting with my film SLR and only use DSLR for learning / quick shots.
26th January 2005, 12:23 AM
Whoa! Getting a little personal aren't we, must have struck a nerve.....chill pal...
Originally Posted by Winston
Think you have totally missed my point. As I have said many many times, a lot of how you feel about this issue depends on where you are coming from. To the old-timers who have cut their teeth using film, they will swear by it. For me, and many others, who learnt little with film, but a lot with digital, the answer is as clear as digital...ooops, crystal.
If you are the shoot shoot shoot, delete delete delete type of photographer with digital, you really think you'd be much better off with film? All you will turn out to be will is a shoot shoot shoot, print print print, throw throw throw type of photographer. You've met some of those, haven't you?
Shooting film does not make you a better photog than shooting digital. Having the discipline to read up, learn your camera, check what you are doing wrong, these are the elements of learning photography. Digital just makes it easier.
By the way, there is nothing wrong with "liking" to take pictures vs "liking" photography. Its just a tool after all. And I resent your snide comment about Rome, it is after all a nice city, and far better to view the sights than to view the photos of the sights to remind me of the sights I missed when I was busy taking photos....and learning photography
Last edited by dkw; 26th January 2005 at 12:31 AM.
26th January 2005, 01:07 AM
Actually dkw, I am a shoot, shoot, shoot, del, del, del with digital (G5). Even when I sold off my G5, get my EOS 33, I am still shoot, shoot, shoot, print, print, print, throw, throw, throw kind of people.
After a long break from photography, I sit down, think of what I like to do, look through my pictures from my G5, then I realised what I really want. Granted my pictures now are not much better, still training myself to look at things than to take photos. Before I go for a streetshoot, I would visualise the place I am intending to go, the timing and how the environment looks like etc so as to maximise the output of different films etc. Of course with all these things ready, I can forget about them all (like what film to use, what to take note of, the weather etc) and just enjoy shooting with framing. With digital you might not really spend all the time visualising, but post processing. Like some people say Digital Photography Courses some time are basically Photoshop course.
My sister may be watching this forum, but I would say that she would be better of getting back her foundamentals of photography before she attempts to take on a DSLR.
26th January 2005, 01:42 AM
agree with dkw, digital is the fastest easiest way to learn and gain confidence in photography. if u can afford it, get the 300D, if not, get the A95.
28th January 2005, 10:03 PM
i sorri guy. i reply too slow coz iim in ns
i actuallty thought of intending to buy d70 with my sister monthly instalment and to buy the set at $1500 and below. hope so. another im worried is that will this camera is obsolete until in cant used it for doing quality photography.
i a true newbie. but to me. i realise, dslr camera are reali reaching a class that picture taken are reali clear and gd, marking an obivious benchmark among prosumer and other.
however, picture would be more fine and sharp if u apply the fundamental accurately. by understanding the art of photography, i may slowly be able to capture picture that is meaningful and priceless.
after hearing wad u guy says. d70 is more appropriate if i want to learn shooting portrait and wedding shooting+scenery.
29th January 2005, 01:28 AM