What Camera do you have?

[Coyote]

Just curious among those taking photographs - what camera do you have (including lenses) - what do and don't you like about it
and what would be the next camera you would buy if you had the chance?

[icejammer]

Camera(s): a little (film) Kodak point-and-shoot, a Pentax ME (with half a roll of film from 6 months ago still on it!) with a 50 mm (Pentax) and 70-210 mm (off-brand), Pentax ME Super with 50mm, Fujifilm FinePix 3800, and Canon EOS 30D with 18-55 mm and 75-300 mm (okay, technically that's my wife's camera, but I manage to sneak some shots with it once in awhile!).  What don't I like?  Not having unfettered access to the Canon!  What camera would I like?  Top of the line Canon or Nikon, not much diff, is there?

[Hyde]

Nikon D200

Nikkor AF 2.8 10.5mm Fisheye

Nikkor AF-S 2.8 17-55mm

Nikkor AF-S VR 2.8 70-200mm

-

Sony DSC-F717
Sony DSC-R1
Sony HDR-HC1

[Coyote]

Forgot to put mine down-

Sony DSC-F717
Canon AE-1 50 mm with a Vivitar 80-200

The Sony uses the memory stick pro which I found out a couple months ago they discontinued. Bummer.

[the1wags]

I have the Nikon D50 with the 18-55mm lens, a 70-300mm, and a 50mm 1.8.

Dang Hyde, wanna trade?

[Brad]

I have a Cannon Digital Rebel XT 8.0 mp with the standard 18-70 kit lens and a Cannon 70-200 lens.

I want to sell it all and get a Cannon 5D (I have saved about half of the money so far may be by the end of the year) and all new lenses with Image Stabilization.

I need a 10mm super wide angle, A standard 18 to 70 IS, and a 70 to 300 IS

[nebugeater]

I have a Cannon Digital Rebel XT 8.0 mp with the standard 18-70 kit lens and a Cannon 70-200 lens.

I want to sell it all and get a Cannon 5D (I have saved about half of the money so far may be by the end of the year) and all new lenses with Image Stabilization.

I need a 10mm super wide angle, A standard 18 to 70 IS, and a 70 to 300 IS

So is a Cannon a cheep knock off of a Canon?  I have never heard of them?    :;):

You should really take a look at what Canon has to offer.   http://www.usa.canon.com/html/canonindex.html

[TechnicalDisaster]

Currently:
Camera
Nikon D200 10.2MP

Lenses
18-70 AFS
70-200mm AFS VR
50mm 1.8

Post Processing Software
90% of post is done with Adobe LightRoom
10% with Photoshop CS
Pano's are assembled with PTGUI


Most people know that I have been around the block with cameras and lenses, so right now I wouldn't buy anything else until a camera comes out that has the following:

Nikon D200 Metering - Better then anything Canon can make.  Probably the biggest thing that made going from the 5D to the D200 worth it.  
Nikon D200 Auto focus - same as above.  My ratio of OOF pictures has greatly improved since going to Nikon.
Nikon D200 Flash exposure - Flippin Brilliant compared to Canon.
Canon High ISO ability - Keeps getting better.  Much better noise handling then Nikon. Nikon Confines me to lower ISO's
Canon Menu and control layout (this is a personal preference) except Nikon D200 has a dedicated MLU button that is a Godsend.
All Canon lenses have manual focus and a focus indicator.  Nikon is hit and miss with seemingly no rhyme or reason.

In general, I wish the camera companies would adopt an industry standard raw format.  

I won't buy a APS-C wide angle lens until one can come out with better barrel distortion.  Brad, if you get the 5D 24mm is quite wide already!  Any wider and your start to see lots of barrel distortion an vignetting near the edges.

My next lens will be a 100mm Macro.  Probably 3rd party like Sigma or Tamron.  With Canon's full frame sensor 5D I found my self needing a lot more dedicated lenses to get the most out of the sensor (I was doing weddings, portraits, and hobby stuff so dedicated lenses was essential) Going back to an APS-C sized sensor I get a lot of use out of just three.

[DTO Luv]

I use a disposable 35mm from Walgreens.

[Brad]

I use a disposable 35mm from Walgreens

Whatever, you have one of the pest cameras on this forum.

[nebport5]

so I'm thinking of upgrading my analog rebel EOS to a digital EOS Rebel XSi.

it features...

-Canon's EOS Integrated Cleaning System
- Live View Function
- a DIGIC III Image Processor
- a 12.2-megapixel CMOS Sensor
- available in a kit with the new EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS lens with Optical Image Stabilizer.
- new 3.0-inch LCD monitor
- compatibility with SD and SDHC Memory cards



any thoughts/ recommendations?

[Choleric]

Pentax K100D

12-24mm
18-55mm
28-250mm
50mm

[Brad]

I forgot about this thread... I have upgraded since my post!

I now shoot with the Canon 5D
24mm to 105mm "L" series with Image Stabilization
I also still have the 70mm to 200mm

[Omababe]

Just curious among those taking photographs - what camera do you have (including lenses) - what do and don't you like about it

I have a small assortment of mostly older film cameras. Mamiya SD, Canon GIII, Pentax K1000, Olympus Stylus.

and what would be the next camera you would buy if you had the chance?

I may be the odd one out here, but there's nothing on the market now that particularly appeals to me. I'm happy with what I have. They do what I want them to do, mostly.

Am I the only film purist here?

[Brad]

Am I the only film purist here?

Sure I would use film..... If I was freaking RICH!

But I would not use it exclusively, I would just play with it some.

[Brad]

Am I the only film purist here?

Sure I would use film..... If I was freaking RICH!

But I would not use it exclusively, I would just play with it some.

The more I think about it... What do you have against digital?  The highest resolution 35mm film that is PERFECTLY EXPOSED and PERFECTLY PROCESSED is about 20MP so you are not looking quality with many of the current cameras on the market.  If you think that Digital is "Cheating" then you are wrong, people have been "cheating" with film for many years.  

Digital is the same thing "Writhing with Light".  You are still focusing light on to a small light sensitive area inside a dark camera.  Its just more cost effective and without all the chemicals.

[DTO Luv]

I shoot mainly with guns.

[Omababe]

The more I think about it... What do you have against digital?

Uh, nothing, really.

I just haven't felt the need or desire to use digital.

If you think that Digital is "Cheating" then you are wrong, people have been "cheating" with film for many years.

Digital isn't cheating, any more than using dry plates or roll film is cheating.

Just to clear up any possible misunderstanding, I'm not in any way trying to convince you or anybody else to do things my way or use my brand of camera or anything like that. What I use works for me, and if what works for you works, then do it. If we all used the same gear and did things the same way, the world would be a boring place in which to live.

The main reason I don't adopt digital is that I'm stuck with the same "film" for the life of the camera. To me, anyway, the selection of film is very significant, as each one has its own look and feel and nuances.

I would love to have a camera where digital is an option, as well as film. Yes, there's the Leica DMR, and other than the coincidence of initials it doesn't appeal to me. With the digital module it's like carrying around a press camera! I know there are also a number of digital backs for various MF cameras, but I would sure like a compact 35mm (RF or SLR) which had digital as one of many "film" choices.

[Linkin5]

This is what I use, its not anything special, but it works for the basic stuff.

[DTO Luv]

Apparently if you ask the security at First National they think I have a "high velocity lens".

[Brad]

Apparently if you ask the security at First National they think I have a "high velocity lens".

I framed a photo of the tower for this weekends are show at Rockbrook just for them!

[thenewguy]

Apparently if you ask the security at First National they think I have a "high velocity lens".

I framed a photo of the tower for this weekends are show at Rockbrook just for them!

Does the picture have the tower in the background, and then a security guard with his hand outstretched in the foreground, attempting to cover the lens of the camera?  Oh and the guard has to have an ear piece, and glasses.  I was walking around down there with my fiance on her lunch hour and they don't even like you to have your camera phone out...at least, that's the impression i got from them.  Why are they so heck bent on not having pictures taken anyway?  Do they think everyone is going to sell the photos to terrorists or something?

[DTO Luv]

I don't know but I argued the guy down enough to where his supervisor told him to leave me alone.

Also has anyone heard of copyrights to a public building? The security guy was pulling |expletive| out of his |expletive| about how no one could take pictures of the building unless thy had permission because FNB would sue since they have the copyright.

[the1wags]

They're just idiots. If they owned all photograph rights to their building nobody would be able to take skyline shots at all without their permission. Fact is, its not a military installation or something like that and they have NO legal right to stop people from taking pictures of the tower. D'Shawn and I talked about this, we want to get a flickr walk or equivalent and have a ton of people show up and all start taking shots.  :yes:

[TechnicalDisaster]

I don't know but I argued the guy down enough to where his supervisor told him to leave me alone.

Also has anyone heard of copyrights to a public building? The security guy was pulling |expletive| out of his |expletive| about how no one could take pictures of the building unless thy had permission because FNB would sue since they have the copyright.

Yes, you can absolutely copyright a building.  BUT, as long as the building can be seen from a public place you're free to do photograph it as long as you photograph it from that public place.

The castles at Walt Disney World and Disneyland are both copyrighted. You're free to photograph it, but you are not allowed to sell your pictures of the castle.  Disney will send you a C&D order if they figure out your making money from their building.  There are other buildings in major cities that carry the same copyright (many sports stadiums) to keep people from using the likeness or making a nickle off a sold print.

FNB may have a copyright, but if you photograph the building in context (as part of a cityscape) and not taking pictures of it on FNB property you are well within your rights.

D'Shawn and I talked about this, we want to get a flickr walk or equivalent and have a ton of people show up and all start taking shots.

Count me in.  If we can do it in May, all the better. (I'm super busy in June)  I'll bring the video camera.

[TechnicalDisaster]

The main reason I don't adopt digital is that I'm stuck with the same "film" for the life of the camera. To me, anyway, the selection of film is very significant, as each one has its own look and feel and nuances.

There are a ton of photoshop plugins that can emulate any kind of film.  I used a Velvia PS action on a lot of my images for a long time.  Some Digital cameras (the new Nikons, I think) even have modes that you can set to emulate the film right in camera.  I'm sure a google search could lead you to many of the free ones.

BTW, if anyone is hankering for shooting some old school film, I'm selling my Canon AE-1 with a bunch of FD lenses for $60.  I'll even throw in some Tri-Xpan 400 film. It's in great working order.

[TechnicalDisaster]

BTW, here is the law

http://www.photosecrets.com/tips.law.html

Buildings
Only buildings created after December 1, 1990 are protected by copyright. Fortunately for photographers, the copyright in an architectural work does not include the right to prevent others from making and distributing photos of the constructed building, if the building is located in a public place or is visible from a public place. So you don't need permission to stand on a public street and photograph a public building. You don't need permission to photograph a public building from inside the building (although you may need permission to photograph separately-owned decorative objects in the building, such as a statue). You don't need permission to stand on a public street and photograph a private building such as a church or a house.

This "photographer's exception" to the copyright-owner's rights applies only to buildings, a category which includes houses, office buildings, churches, gazebos, and garden pavilions. The exception does not apply to monuments (protectable as "sculptural works") or other copyrighted works, such as statues and paintings.

We can bring this with us when we go on that Flickr walk.

[the1wags]

I'm in Utah until the 15th but after that I'm ready to go. I know DTO, me, Chris Bradley and Brad would all be in. This should be entertainment value, who else is in?

[TechnicalDisaster]

I e-mailed the Douglas County Attorney's office and the Nebraska Attorney General for their opinion on the matter.  If we force a confrontation I want to be armed with as much legal jargon as we can have.

We'll need to be extremely polite with the security guards, but persistent and aggressive at the same time.  I'll video tape any encounters we have, and I'll escalate the issue as much as I can if we're told we can't take pictures on public property.

[almighty_tuna]

I e-mailed the Douglas County Attorney's office and the Nebraska Attorney General for their opinion on the matter.  If we force a confrontation I want to be armed with as much legal jargon as we can have.

We'll need to be extremely polite with the security guards, but persistent and aggressive at the same time.  I'll video tape any encounters we have, and I'll escalate the issue as much as I can if we're told we can't take pictures on public property.

I'm in, schedule permitting, and can bring a friend.  

Anyone want to pitch in towards renting a 400mm f/4 from rockbrook to up the "threat factor"?  lol, j/k

[Coyote]

Count me in also - provided I am not scheduled for something else.

[Omababe]

Count me in also - provided I am not scheduled for something else.

When is this happening? I've never been part of a "Photo Protest" before.

In all fairness to FNB, I've taken countless photos of the FNB tower over the years, both day and night, and never been confronted. However, here is not the only place I've heard that other photographers have been hassled doing it.

[TechnicalDisaster]

We'll get a day sorted out.

In the meantime, I found this nifty USA today article that outlines photographers rights.  It also has links to the "Photographers Bill of Rights" that I carry with me.  Anyone who shoots pictures should read this, so they know they are almost always in the right:

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/ ... laws_x.htm

and here is a direct link to the Photographers Right PDF:
http://www.krages.com/ThePhotographersRight.pdf

[Omababe]

In the meantime, I found this nifty USA today article that outlines photographers rights.

This contradicts what an attorney (off the clock, so not really legal advice) told me. This was specifically regarding casinos and shopping malls in Nevada.

He said it was not illegal, per se, to shoot in a casino or shopping mall, but the management of the property did have the right to "control the use" of the property and could ban photos if they wanted to.

He also said that they can legally remove you from the property for taking photos or for just about anything they want to.

http://www.krages.com/ThePhotographersRight.pdf

Krages also has a book on the topic. It's an interesting read. I got it out at the Barnes And Noble at Oakroads a couple years ago.

[TechnicalDisaster]

Malls and casino's are private property.  You can't shoot from inside those facilities without permission, but you have every right to shoot the outside of the building as long as you are on public property.  You think Las Vegas harasses tourists who take pictures of the casino's from the street?  Fat chance

FNB security guards are harrassing photographers who are taking pictures of the building from a public sidewalk.  They have no right to do so.

[Brad]

FNB security guards are harrassing photographers who are taking pictures of the building from a public sidewalk.  They have no right to do so.

They did have a good point a few months ago... They have just as much right to stand in front of your camera on a public sidewalk as you have to be on that public sidewalk.  I just think if we have more than four or five people we will outnumber them!  I can't wait to see their faces!

[Omababe]

Malls and casino's are private property.  You can't shoot from inside those facilities without permission,

The USA Today article claims otherwise. I think that you and the attorney are correct, however.

A mall, for example, is open to the public. So are most office buildings (at least the lobbies). You don't need permission; if you have permission to enter, you have permission to shoot.

You think Las Vegas harasses tourists who take pictures of the casino's from the street?  Fat chance

What brought this on was a case where an amateur photographer was harassed by private security for taking photos of and around the Fashion Show Mall in Las Vegas. They were on a sidewalk, which the guard claimed was their private property.

A similar case came a couple years later when another photographer was harassed for taking photos of the construction of Project City Center, across from the MGM Grand casino. The private security guard cited "Homeland Security" for the restriction and threatened to turn the photographer over to the TLA.

FNB security guards are harrassing photographers who are taking pictures of the building from a public sidewalk.  They have no right to do so.

I'm wondering who is giving the orders to confront amateur photographers? Certainly FNB's management has house counsel who's aware of the legal and intellectual property issues. I would think so, anyway.

[TechnicalDisaster]

FNB security guards are harrassing photographers who are taking pictures of the building from a public sidewalk.  They have no right to do so.

They did have a good point a few months ago... They have just as much right to stand in front of your camera on a public sidewalk as you have to be on that public sidewalk.  I just think if we have more than four or five people we will outnumber them!  I can't wait to see their faces!

From the Bill of rights:

Although anyone has the right to
approach a person in a public place
and ask questions, persistent and
unwanted conduct done without a
legitimate purpose is a crime in many
states if it causes serious annoyance.

Like I said, I made inquiries to state and county attorneys offices so that we'll be clear on Nebraska law, but security guards shouldn't be allowed to be an impediment to our picture taking.  IANAL, but the only trouble we could get in (from OPD) is if we were blocking foot traffic on the sidewalk.  They can ask us to step out of the way.  If a security guard is purposely blocking our right of way, I would think he would have to obey the same rules we do.

Placing their hands on our equipment, or placing their hands on our persons is serious harassment.  If we are confronted, I plan on continuing to walk forward while taking pictures.  They will have to physically stop me.  I'll be super polite and answer any legitimate questions they have, but I won't let them stop me from taking pictures.

[nalek]

so I'm thinking of upgrading my analog rebel EOS to a digital EOS Rebel XSi.


any thoughts/ recommendations?

I bought the XSi about 3 weeks ago, upgraded from the Canon S3IS.
Its my first DSLR, but im starting to learn alot more with it. Its an awesome camera.

[gisbuxfan]

Hey, I need some help...I am looking for a new camera, maybe you can help me as I am a novice. Here is what I am looking for:

Digital SLR
2.5" LCD Screen
8.0 MP or better
price range: $500 - $650

Any suggestions?