Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 55

Thread: PLS HELP, wishes to take up photography.. camera selection.

  1. #21

    Default

    anyway

    THANKS A LOT FOR ALL YOUR HELP !!! KIWI AND ZERSTORER !!


  2. #22

    Default

    Originally posted by Kiwi

    Much said, I still feel prosumer cameras even with manual controls don't teach you rigorously about the fundamentals of phtoography, in terms of exposure especially. U still have to fall back on your film SLR and DSLR.
    Actually digital is less forgiving of exposure errors, especially compared to a negatives user whose exposure errors are compensated for by the lab.(maybe if using slides it would be similar)

    The main problem with digital for learning is that mistakes are not painful and are therefore usually not enforced if one is not disciplined. There is often the inclination to just delete the bad image rather than to seriously ponder over what went wrong and to strive not to repeat the mistake.

    For a shot on film/print, it is there to haunt you unless you throw it away.

  3. #23

    Default

    Originally posted by sequitur
    hi

    thanks for replying


    i want to shoot nice and sharp and really beautiful images (landscapes and nights and some effects images) AND also learn about the technical aspects of photography.

    .....

    furthermore there's a lot of "film developing" costs.. which i'm quite unprepared to fork out coz i don't really come from a well-to-do family and i'm digging out a few year's of savings for this new hobby

    Hi,

    forget about wanting to take nice and beautiful pictures. Forget about whether you want this cam or that cam, or digital vs film.

    BECAUSE when you have spent enough of your hard-earned money and savings, then you will realise that this is, after all, just a form of self-entertainment. Sure, people "ooh" and "aah" if you have a good shot, but this is something for yourself, you get a kick out of it when you are satisfied with what pictures you have churned out. It is to a certain extent, self-actualising.

    What you see in the photo galleries, here and everywhere else, is really the fruit of many many hours, years of learning and sweating. The training that is needed to produce both technically acceptable photos and then to true "works of art" is tough.

    And many many people, far more talented, more hardworking, and richer than you and I, have come onto this path and have given up half way because the premise they started out is wrong.

    Start photography because you realise that life is passing you by, and as the people around you are growing and aging, as things around you are changing, as life around you is being transformed, be a recorder of such events. Then you will find meaning in photography.

    Start on that premise, begin with taking photos of your nephew's birthday parties, or a blade of grass, or a man on the street. As you find out what kind of photos you like to take, you will grow to excel in it.

    AND FOR STARTERS, you can always pick up a digital camera with full manual functions (e.g. Canon A70), and then learn about the camera itself, and what it can do, what it cannot do, and what you want it to do. Then you will naturally move to other cameras, and to film.

    Most importantly, enjoy yourself, be curious and be teachable, because there is nothing worse than spending a bomb, then realise "I hate photography".


  4. #24

    Default

    Originally posted by Zerstorer
    Actually digital is less forgiving of exposure errors, especially compared to a negatives user whose exposure errors are compensated for by the lab.(maybe if using slides it would be similar)

    The main problem with digital for learning is that mistakes are not painful and are therefore usually not enforced if one is not disciplined. There is often the inclination to just delete the bad image rather than to seriously ponder over what went wrong and to strive not to repeat the mistake.

    For a shot on film/print, it is there to haunt you unless you throw it away.

    HMM

    that indeed is very very much worth considering !!

    i'll take that in mind

  5. #25

    Default

    Originally posted by fruitybix
    Hi,

    forget about wanting to take nice and beautiful pictures. Forget about whether you want this cam or that cam, or digital vs film.

    BECAUSE when you have spent enough of your hard-earned money and savings, then you will realise that this is, after all, just a form of self-entertainment. Sure, people "ooh" and "aah" if you have a good shot, but this is something for yourself, you get a kick out of it when you are satisfied with what pictures you have churned out. It is to a certain extent, self-actualising.

    What you see in the photo galleries, here and everywhere else, is really the fruit of many many hours, years of learning and sweating. The training that is needed to produce both technically acceptable photos and then to true "works of art" is tough.

    And many many people, far more talented, more hardworking, and richer than you and I, have come onto this path and have given up half way because the premise they started out is wrong.

    Start photography because you realise that life is passing you by, and as the people around you are growing and aging, as things around you are changing, as life around you is being transformed, be a recorder of such events. Then you will find meaning in photography.

    Start on that premise, begin with taking photos of your nephew's birthday parties, or a blade of grass, or a man on the street. As you find out what kind of photos you like to take, you will grow to excel in it.

    AND FOR STARTERS, you can always pick up a digital camera with full manual functions (e.g. Canon A70), and then learn about the camera itself, and what it can do, what it cannot do, and what you want it to do. Then you will naturally move to other cameras, and to film.

    Most importantly, enjoy yourself, be curious and be teachable, because there is nothing worse than spending a bomb, then realise "I hate photography".


    man

    i love photography

    i once expended a WHOLE 36 roll of film just taking the sunrise everyday from my window (i live on the 16th floor of a HDB flat and i can see east coast park)... on a pentax point and shoot camera..

    some of them look like sh1t.. and actually.. all of them looked like sh1t except ONE which i was REALLY REALLY pleased about..

    well my mother almost kicked me out of the house for spending $15 on the film and they're all shots of the same sunrise..


  6. #26

    Default

    hmm...
    interesting....


    BUY BUY BUY!

  7. #27
    Digimage
    Guests

    Default

    10 years ago I was like you reading about camera and review and end up buying & selling. I dont think you want to do that. you will end up loose a lot of money. but gain experience the hard way.

    Just an advice, the choice that you make must be able to do your job. You stated landscape, so choose the lens that can do landscape, a SLR that support remote cable shutter release, , camera that can set to bulb mode for long shutter,a stable tripod and so on.

    Then look for a camera model that have all these function. When you read from magazine about eos300, and the review is good dont just assume is good. Go to a good camera shop, you need to feel the camera in your hands if you like it, too heavy or too light, check the features, is the knob easilly assible, What information in the view finder, what asscerious that support the camera and so on.....
    If you dont like this model, ask to look for the next one. compare notes, dont buy yet, evaluate which camera and lens can do the job that you wanted. Eventually you will boil down to the one that suit you.

    eg. As for me I prefer a full grip, short grip dont feel stable.
    hope this help.

  8. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    In the void.
    Posts
    1,323

    Default

    Hi sequitur,
    From I read from your previous post, I feel that you are trying to jump the gun too quickly. It doesn't really matter which option you go for really. Cos beautiful pictures can be obtained by both digital or film. The point is, you have to take things a bit slower, cos skill comes with time.

    Though, if you can't afford a DSLR yet, I will suggest you get a traditional film SLR first. And what I suggest, forget the digicam if you are just going to use it to preview the shots before using the SLR. There wun be any pressure to improve yourself at all, if you can preview your shots everytime. It's better to learn from your own mistakes and screwed up pictures. Also a film SLR, will offer you more creativity choices in terms of lens selection. Especially if you are into landscape where wide-angles are not commonly on the digital format.

  9. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    In the void.
    Posts
    1,323

    Default

    And about your choice of the EOS 300.... if you are serious about photography, it's not really the one you would go. Sure, it's a pretty camera, but it's not going to last very long. I will suggest going for the EOS30 instead, it's a much better build and offers more. Think it's going in the $700+region now.

    When I first started photography on an EOS 500, I burned through 60+ rows of film in my first year alone. I was on a Tamron 28-200 then, which effectively covered everything I wanted to shoot. After 5 years of faithful service, I had to retire my dear EOS 500 after the shutter and buttons started failing.

    Don't think about pro-lens so quickly, you need to build up on your skills first before you can really appreciate the wonders of pro-lens.

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Behind a lens
    Posts
    2,312

    Default

    If you are serious abt photography and dun have much $$.

    I think film cam will be better.

    The price of a digital cam drop too fast. Imagine a A20.
    3 years ago is 700+
    2 years ago is 500+
    3 years ago is 300+
    now, almost worhless or $100?

  11. #31
    Deregistered
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Planet Nikon
    Posts
    21,905

    Default

    If you want to learn photography, I can tell u for sure film based SLRs are the way to go. A simple 28-135mm lens would suffice as a learning ground, only by error do you truly learn, for digital sadly, people just trial and error but forgot to remember what they just tested and the best way to take pictures in that circumstance.

    I don't think it's an idea to have a digital for u to test shots before you take them on the SLR, 1 - waste time to trial and error, 2 - too over dependant on the digital, 3 - you'll endup throwing ur SLR away in long run, 4 you won't learn anything in the end.

    I would suggest if you're really serious, go full into SLR.

    If you're concerned about film + developing costs (like me *ahem*) then i would suggest you go digital. It's film and developing cost that will drive you to take pictures good, once for all.

    Digital will save you scanning time + film & developing costs. But I advise you to take it seriously as to learn from mistakes taken from digital reshoots/trial n error.

    Another way is DSLR, and a cheap lens. But DSLRs aren't cheap.

  12. #32

    Default

    IMHO, nothing is better as a learning tool than a fully manual SLR. It will give you total control over your exposures.

    If you're going down the (D)SLR path, I'd recommend that you don't worry about lenses too much. Get one, or two of different focal lengths, and keep on using them till you really need other lenses to perform some other kind of imagery. For starters, fixed focals like the 50mm is a good buy.

    I believe you can a used manual Nikon + 50mm for less than your budget. I bought one such setup last year for $250. Have a look around The Camera Workshop.

    Don't worry too much about spending too much on film. If you're really serious, you will be taking shot after shot and nobody can stop you. Just don't let your mom see what you're doing. Practice makes perfect.

    You're probably going to spend money on printing even if you use a digital camera.

  13. #33

    Default

    Finally, someone said something about manual cameras.

    If you want to really learn, no shortcuts. Plus they can be cheap, and are better built than today's wunder-plastik AF cameras.

  14. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Behind a lens
    Posts
    2,312

    Default

    Originally posted by YSLee
    Finally, someone said something about manual cameras.

    If you want to really learn, no shortcuts. Plus they can be cheap, and are better built than today's wunder-plastik AF cameras.
    Ya. I agree manual is the way to go.

    However, I would suggest you to get a AF one. You never know when you will find this function useful. (eg. in a party or wedding)
    AF will be useful in street/human photography. I know some can MF as fast but teh number is small.

    Though cheaper AF body has some plastic, it will last a long long in normal usage.

    When you are using film, you will sting on film(at least I will). Compose and check metering.. If everything is swee swee. Then squeeze trigger.

  15. #35

    Default

    Originally posted by binbeto
    When you are using film, you will sting on film(at least I will). Compose and check metering.. If everything is swee swee. Then squeeze trigger.
    And this is when you will really learn about photography...

  16. #36
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Sengkang
    Posts
    567

    Default

    Well, my view is -> get a film slr if ur budget is that tight.
    Why slr instead of those prosumer digital camera?
    Well, becoz it is cheaper in a sense(2nd hand will save u a lot more) and basically suits the learning process for photography.
    For a digital camera with features the same as a film slr, and yet does not cost a bomb ->DSLR is impossible.
    Not to mention the benefit of interchangable lenses.

    I personally started out with film less than 1 year ago, from a 2nd hand eos500n with kit lens, started shooting out with films, then later slides film. Before this i have a canon V3, and also played ard with my room mate's A40.

    Prefer film slr than digital. Think some feel like that too, personally i know wormz is a good example, he shifted to eos30 and sold off his sony f717.

    50mm/1.8 is the next thing to buy, cheap and really under-valued in price for its performance, that is the good thing abt primes.
    And with prime lens, u are restricted to this, thus u have to always think more and explore more ways to take ur pictures, unlike zoom, whereby one would be lazy sometimes and just zoom from a dull angle.

    Then after some testing out with the eos500n for quite a while, decided to buy a 2nd hand eos50. Wow... totally different experiance handling both cameras.
    Not to say eos500n is not good, it served me well. And helped me to learn more before deciding to get higher end cameras to suit some growing needs.

    Then some lens purchasing.

    In the process, i realized, as what others had said in this thread, starting out with a 2nd hand film slr is good. If u happen to upgrade it, you don't loss too much $$.
    And who told u that lenses will be very very expensive? Come on, just buy, learn, sell, upgrade, is also another path.
    Of course if u r rich, u could purchase higher end lenses like L lens as a start too.

    As for film cost, maybe u would like to try out slides films? Cheap developement - $4-5, and with color saturations that prosumer digital camera could not fight with. And bulk film to cut down the slides film cost.
    As u stated that u want to take beautiful landscape, u definitely would like to try out velvia slide film, will blow u away.
    think currently no digital prosumer camera achieve this?
    And using slides film u will learn faster as it has less tolerance (much less) as compared to normal films to wrong exposure.

    So in short, my advice is start out with a film camera body ( cheap 2nd hand) plus few lenses, there u go.

    A cut down on the cost:
    Eos300 *2nd hand body = $300
    EF50/1.8 lens = $130 New
    EF28-105 F3.5-4.5 = $320 2nd hand
    Flash??

    total ard 750? or maybe u spend 300 more and get the package of 2nd hand eos30, won't it cost much less?

    Cheers.

  17. #37

    Default

    Originally posted by cheechee
    As for film cost, maybe u would like to try out slides films? Cheap developement - $4-5, and with color saturations that prosumer digital camera could not fight with. And bulk film to cut down the slides film cost.

    As u stated that u want to take beautiful landscape, u definitely would like to try out velvia slide film, will blow u away.
    actually I wouldn't advise velvia, provia or any of the professional slide films to start with. they're simply too expensive to be used as a learning medium.

    you could try the cheaper slide film like Astia

  18. #38

    Default

    well i also newbie here, but too bad started on the wrong footing at clubsnap but nvm.

    for me i also like u very budget concious one cause i also very little money to spend. for me i tell u what i did ok

    i bought a f65 + 2 lens, i think is 28 to 80 and 80 to 300mm i think well i dont really remember the figures, i dont care i just wanna shoot. then go join safra photoclub.$650

    why cause can use their scanner lah $4 for 3 hours i think, but there seldom see people use lah. so i develop flim + colour flim
    around $6 loh then save up to 2 or 3 rolls then go there scan lah of course i dont do correction. save time mah come home then touch up a bit. as long can see can already as my standard quite low one.

    but here there's a fella called void he told me some stuff about b&W so i decided i would want to take the B&W photography course later, now applying for basic photography first.nice guy though.

    know why i want do B&W also cause of money loh. the chemicals there for developing are free, after developing i just need to scan and that's it develop myself save on developing costs lah. i dont know how much B& W film cost so i might only pay like $4 or more for the film??

    0.25 x 36 = $9 + $3 for developing
    round it to around $12++ loh

    i develop only $3 + $3 for fuji flim(cause cheaper than kodak)
    + $4 for scanning = 10 + 2(transport) = $12
    see still got 2 dollar for transport hee hee but i guess yr a student loh so should be less.

    but if i use B&W dont count spoilage lah. if flim is $5 + free chem + $4 scanning = $9.

    + for scanning u using nikon scanner leh forgot model already but i think is around $2000++ one

    so total its 650(camera + lenses) + dry box $100 20L (ithink) + silk u 9000 tripod $50. + $51 (basic photo class) + 2yr photo club membership $36

    total expenditure is 851+36 + future B&W course i think should be less than $100 so total should be less than $1000 total invest ment...

    u still got spare $500.... if like u shoot 1 roll, then develop then scan = 10 per roll then u can shoot 50 rolls of flim loh
    if 10 rolls permonth, then works out to 5 months of shooting.
    can shoot like siao imagine 360 photos per month...

    so think i cheapo no choice lah... flame me go ahead...
    think its not a good way nvm still my way i dont care. hee hee

    this my path lah still walking on loh if u think its not good advice dont follow, i just trying out.

  19. #39

    Default

    seriously speaking, option B is out

    because u want to learn the real photography technical skills then start from a simple film body and a good lens eg 28/2.8 or 50/1.8. or 100/2.8 and a cheap tripod. becoz film is still cheaper than digital, this way u cut down your initial costs

    advise: if u want zoom lens its better to save up for those f2.8 types even if it means waiting for quite some time. sometimes it is always better to wait and then be able to get better things once and for all. really, pls try to avoid the scenario of getting slower zoom then upgrading bcoz that way u end up spending more

    once u r comfortable with the essential photo skills then choice of equiptment will be entirely up to u.

    goodluck and have fun!

  20. #40

    Default

    Originally posted by Zerstorer

    I don't recommend the F717 for learning as it lacks any form of manual control and has limited aperture/shutter settings. It does however give some of the best images possible from a consumer digicam.

    May I know what manual control are you talking abt that is lacking in Sony 717? If you are referring to saturation control, then I thnk that it is not really important as you can do that easily in photoshop.

    If you are looking at a prosumer camera, I would strongly recommend a Sony F717. It is an excellent learning camera with a high quality lens. Image quality is top notch and you can do IR photography.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •