Is it me or the camera?

[Tim V]

Thanks that is good advice, I do often take a tripod but have not got round to using it. Perhaps its because I like to get shots from both sides of the bridge and not using the tripod makes that easier, although tripods are not heavy are they, and yes it would certainly help the wonky horizons wouldn't it.

 

I found the book - it's "How to photograph trains" by JD Mills published in 1957 by Fountain Press. Worth a read, everything in there about taking photos is still relevant.

 

What strikes me with your shooting from both sides of the bridge is: are you trying to take photographs or snaps?

[beast66606]

What strikes me with your shooting from both sides of the bridge is: are you trying to take photographs or snaps?

 

I photograph and video from both sides of bridges, I'm not sure I appreciate your implication that anyone who does so is only a snapper.

 

btw -there are far more recent books on photography, specialising in digital photography, which has far more latitude than negatives and substantially more than slides.

 

The OP may like to try this

 

http://www.amazon.co...y/dp/0711033412

[dave_long]

Tim

not sure about the photographs v snaps comment. I don't have inside Gen and don't go out to get one shot I go out to see what comes my way. I did also say I'm just starting out taking photos of railways. Why do you think I'm talking of improving the noise and colours of my photos if I was just after snaps.

 

Anyway thanks for the book info that may be one my library might hold.

 

Beast

Thanks for the book link I shall try my local bookshop sh stocks plenty of railway and photography books but iffy not I shall order that thanks.

[Ozexpatriate]

The root of your question is a 'laws of physics' issue.

 

A high density/small sensor CCD like your FZ38 with 12 Megapixels at 1/2.33" (6.08mm x 4.56 mm) will exhibit higher noise, particularly at higher ISO levels.

 

For a first-order analysis:

• In lower light (or faster shutter speed), the image signal is less;
  
• Assuming constant noise;
  
• Higher ISO (higher gain on the CCD output) amplifies both image (signal) and noise, decreasing the signal to noise ratio.
  

A larger sensor with the same number of pixels at say, 23.3mm x 15.7mm will have relatively more noise immunity. You will generally get a larger sensor in a DSLR. Cameras with full frame sensors (comparable to 35mm image size) are very expensive.

 

DSLRs have their own issues. Fast optics (like zooms with a f2.8 maximum aperture) are also quite expensive and are likely to be big and heavy. My own (not particularly well informed experiences) suggests that Canon has a lead over Nikon. (I had problems with the mirror/shutter mechanism on my first Nikon DSLR which is something you won't experience in your 'bridge' camera.) But brand loyalty is a funny thing and your mileage will vary.

[Katier]

DSLRs have their own issues. Fast optics (like zooms with a f2.8 maximum aperture) are also quite expensive and are likely to be big and heavy. My own (not particularly well informed experiences) suggests that Canon has a lead over Nikon. (I had problems with the mirror/shutter mechanism on my first Nikon DSLR which is something you won't experience in your 'bridge' camera.) But brand loyalty is a funny thing and your mileage will vary.

 

To be honest choose a Pentax, Canon or Nikon and they are broadly the same in performance and quality... That said for those looking for a new DSLR with no current lenses the new Pentax K-30 looks to be the best mid-range camera... bar none. It also looks to be an ideal camera for outdoors work as it's entire physical design is centered around durability and water resistance. Most semi-professional cameras can't even muster than kind of specification.

 

Now I will admit a slight bias as I have used and loved Pentax's for years, so there is some brand loyalty, but unless your planning on going really hard core press-style professional, honestly I still think Pentax are the brand of choice. That isn't to say Canon and Nikon are bad, just that the plus points for Pentax, for me, outweigh the fact they don't (currently) have any top-end professional DSLR bodies. (They do a medium format body instead but a full frame pro body is rumoured for this year)

 

Pro's

Most of their bodies are waterproofed, many with a metallic frame internally - the K-30 is polycarbonate.

The k-series mount.

" a photographers camera " they are designed to be solid workmanlike cameras with no frills but superb image quality.

 

Con's

They usually have a compromise somewhere in their feature set which is usually 'cited' in a review but doesn't tend to effect overall score. For instance the K-30 will take video but clearly it's a very secondary use as the video aspect has compromises - probably to keep costs down while retaining the ability to be a fantastic stills camera.

[dave_long]

Ozex

Thanks for the info, I do think that what I feel my photos are lacking (other than better composition) boils down to the sensor. I feel that perhaps I should look further into a dslr of some kind.

 

Katier

My first SLR was Pentax and I did love it, but Uni and work made me miss the start of digital photography and I'm only coming back to it now. I'll still use the FZ38 as a main camera for everyday use, and that has HD video and it is good. So I wouldnt need the dslr for that, so perhaps an older dslr body with a newer lense. To be honest I would only use it for railway photography. (as it stands at the moment anyway)

[Katier]

Regarding the lenses don't worry about age, a good condition 40 year old Pentax K-Mount lens will work fantastically well on a Pentax DSLR body. I use a K200D which is the previous camera to the K30.

 

Lenses I use include the classic 50mm f1.7 and a M42 screw mount wide angle lens.

[dave_long]

I thought old manual lenses didn't perform as well on digital cameras as they did on film slrs. I have a bag full of film Minolta gear with some lenses that are very good quality. Perhaps a sony body then?

[Trevellan]

I've stayed out of this exchange until now after seeing some of the opinions expressed, but I think a few comments seem appropriate at this stage.

 

I took my first photographs in 1967 and have made lots of mistakes over the years - and I still do occasionally! Practice and perseverance will help minimise gaffs and, despite what you might read, certain techniques and rules, e.g. composition, shutter speeds, apertures, depth of field etc, are the same whatever gear you are using. However, digital cameras have given me far more flexibility than film cameras, particularly around ISO settings.

 

I've had two bridge cameras and, while both were fine up to a point, I soon found their limitations, just as you have done. The second one I still use occasionally, even though it has a low (by current standards) pixel count of 6mp, but good images from this camera have been published up to A5 in size. I won't get involved in the sensor size vs noise debate, suffice it to say that smaller sensors will always be a compromise. These days I aim to shoot top quality images at all times and this has driven me towards high-end pro kit, but I've got some superb material shot on far cheaper kit. I learned many years ago that expensive gear doesn't automatically make for a better photographer any more than buying an expensive car makes you a better driver.

 

Finally, on recycling manual lenses, I have tried this with varying degrees of success. I even bought an adapter that allows me to use Zeiss lenses from my medium format kit on my best DSLR. Frankly, it's good fun for unimportant shots and experimentation, but a lot of faffing. For most of my output I need to work quickly and instinctively, exploiting the characteristics of the kit I'm using. Quite often it comes down to one camera and one lens.

 

As others have commented, many of your shots look pretty good, so I wouldn't beat yourself up too much over noise etc. If you're anything like me you'll be driven to improve picture quality and that usually means some investment (but see comment above about expensive gear). Good luck and enjoy the journey!

[Suzie]

Nothing has changed since the days of film in that you have to compromise one of ISO, F-stop or shutter speed because of the low light that is available in the UK. Make the most of June! Having a larger sensor is not always the answer because it will require more light to illuminate it from a lower F-stop and will reduce your depth of field, that is why 35mm became so popular - you could get away with a smaller lens

 

At the end of the day you are trying to take difficult pictures when you have a fast moving subject with a big depth of field and poor light. There is going to be some noise in the picture, you just have to manage it. In the days of film it would be decide the shutter speed and maximum aperture that was required to get the image, then use the light meter to choose the appropriate ISO film (or make notes as to how far you would push the processing) to get a good exposure with those settings, and you are looking at the type of scene for which 200, 400 and 1000 ISO film was made for. There is probably some benefit of using a light meter to manage your expectation of what you are going to get, but good results are going to come from the post processing of the images to remove the noise. In the days of film there would be correction in the printing to remove the graininess, it is the same thing.

[Katier]

I thought old manual lenses didn't perform as well on digital cameras as they did on film slrs. I have a bag full of film Minolta gear with some lenses that are very good quality. Perhaps a sony body then?

 

Pentax and Nikon have retained their mounts from film days and their lenses therefore plug straight onto the bodies, no adapters, and work very very well. You might find it beneficial to change the focus screen to a film SLR split focus one (3 minute job on a Pentax - and doesn't effect warranty) but other than that the performance is excellent. Pentax have one plus over Nikon, in that they retain an in-body AF motor so all Pentax AF lenses ( bar literally two - which are that rare they aren't worth worrying about - from the Me-F) will autofocus on all DSLR bodies.

 

Nikon remove their in-body motors from most of the lower end bodies so while screw drive AF lenses will mount, focusing has to be manual.

 

Minolta changed the mount radically when they switched to AF, so if your Minolta lenses are of the manual focus variety they are useless I am afraid.

 

@Suzie your analogy is wrong way round, the larger sensor gathers light quicker, so doesn't need to amplify the light so much (it's the amplification/gain that creates the noise). Given the same gain level, same MP ( so the DSLR pixel density is much less ) and smaller sensor will need a wider aperture to capture the image correctly.

[dave_long]

Thanks for the input and your experiences. I feel that I've gained a lot more experience and know how with regards to the principles ie ISOs, shutter speeds and apertures etc by trying to get the best out of this camera that I feel confident that I could get on with a dslr reasonably quickly if/when I make the leap. Don't get me wrong I am happy with some of the photos I have taken and there are many more than I have discarded, the deal breaker for digital really. However I feel as though the colours and the vibrancy of the photos from this camera aren't good enough for what I'd like to see, if you know what I mean, I think that if that was slightly better then the noise wouldn't be too much of an issue. Also I do expect noise above 200/250 iso with this camera, but I feel that its obvious even in some of the photos I've got at 80-150.

 

Katier

Thanks I think I remember a few years back looking into old minolta lenses fitting the new sony line, They can stay locked away in there bag for a while longer. If you need a change of career I'm sure Pentax would have a PR role for you... but I do like the sound of the in body AF.

 

I suspect if I am to continue taking railway photos past this summer then something better does need to be purchased, I am good at hunting out a bargain so I'll have to have a look around. I have the budget to buy a decent brand new body + lense combo, but it depends if I want to. I'd like something that doesn't have the video aspect. I have been looking at the canon and nikon secondhand market, and I'm tempted towards the canon lines, ( I have looked at Pentax and sony too ).

 

I know that we have been talking a lot about the noise issue and I feel that I have an understanding of that now. Is this the cause of the colours looking pale and less vibrant too or is that another story? Especially when you compare the photos I posted on page 1 from me and other at the same location.

[Katier]

The colours is probably correctable (and a common thing to adjust) in that different sensors handle the saturation and related settings differently so some tweaking may well have happened on the posted images while yours are 'straight off camera'. That said the camera may be partially at fault, but difficult to say either way.

[dave_long]

I have spent some time in post processing software trying to get the colours looking better, but haven't found a good way to do this without offsetting something else in the image, and thats with some of the .rw2 (raw) files too.

 

I'll have another go later and post a few images to see what others think.

[Trevellan]

Suzie your analogy is wrong way round, the larger sensor gathers light quicker, so doesn't need to amplify the light so much (it's the amplification/gain that creates the noise). Given the same gain level, same MP ( so the DSLR pixel density is much less ) and smaller sensor will need a wider aperture to capture the image correctly.

 

Quite. My current first choice camera can shoot at ISO1600 and the image is of a superior quality to ISO100 transparency film in a Hasselblad. I still love to use film whenever possible, but for front line work digital wins every time for me.

[beast66606]

Can I remind people that not only has technology improved the quality of cameras over the years, it's also done the same for lenses.

[Katier]

While there is a certain amount of truth in that, the rate of development of lens optics is slow and blurred by budget ranges. As such a good quality older lens is often better than a modern one. They also age much more slowly, for example some of the Pentax limited lenses are several years old but regarded as the best lenses of their type... by any manufacturer.

[Katier]

While there is a certain amount of truth in that, the rate of development of lens optics is slow and blurred by budget ranges. As such a good quality older lens is often better than a modern one. They also age much more slowly, for example some of the Pentax limited lenses are several years old but regarded as the best lenses of their type... by any manufacturer.

[dave_long]

Could I ask an opinion then, would you recommend a new budget option ( budget in this case being £250-400ish ) or a second hand few years old (considered at the time) mid range camera?

[beast66606]

While there is a certain amount of truth in that, the rate of development of lens optics is slow and blurred by budget ranges. As such a good quality older lens is often better than a modern one. They also age much more slowly, for example some of the Pentax limited lenses are several years old but regarded as the best lenses of their type... by any manufacturer.

 

Well the lenses I currently use are 100000x (At least) better than the lenses I used when I first started photographing - nearly 40 years ago. There may be some old lenses which are better than their modern counterparts, but it's a some rather than your implied norm. Improved quality of manufacture improves optical and mechanical components.

[Katier]

For what your looking to do I would say look for a mid range second hand DSLR. Given you want to work outdoors a lot, then I would look initially at seeing if you can get a Pentax K10D, K20D or K200D.. all are metal chassis and weatherproof with plenty enough resolution for what you need ( all are 10mp off top of my head ), I doubt you'd get the 20 in budget but probably the other two if you shop around.

 

 

As for lenses, love to know how you judge 100000x better, I do know for instance that the old 50mm f1.7 lenses are well sought after and were the standard fit for film cameras (and many are into there 30's)

[Ozexpatriate]

With DSLRs a big change I noticed was the shift to autofocus lenses that took place during the last generation of 35mm film SLRs.

 

I loved my old manual focus lenses (incidentally they were Pentax). All the DSLRs (at least in the low-intermediate pricepoints) are autofocus. Relative to this thread focused on DSLR v. 'bridge' this makes no difference, but it does have a big impact on modern lenses. (As Katier indicates you can replace the mirror with a split focus mirror and reuse old lenses.)

 

Lens design was traditionally a balance of optical speed (maximum aperture) and weight. Lenses were mostly glass and metal.

 

Now it's a balance of optical speed, autofocus response time and weight. All of these requirements fight one another and to me it results in somewhat compromised designs with a lot more plastics (eg: polycarbonate lens bodies) and particularly for zoom lenses, generally slower lenses (in terms of maximum aperture) at the same relative price point (compared to say camera bodies) than in the past.

[Katier]

Just to clarify on the split focus - it's a screen, not the mirror itself. On the Pentax a simple clip mechanism holds it in place against the base of the pentaprism. A replacement screen usually comes with the tool and it's a fairly simple job to unclip the old screen and clip in the new one. (on Pentax's - I can't speak for the simplicity on other brands)

[Belsay Lad]

As an old 'film user' I remember the advice I was given. 'You take the photo, the developer and printer give you the print' (having compensated for dodgy exposure, and maybe a bit for the composition if they were feeling happy!)

 

These days we download photos and expect them to be perfect!

 

But your photos look great in my view

[dave_long]

Katier

I do like the look and features of the k20d. Still looking at the others.