Is it me or the camera?

[Katier]

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.

 

It's interesting how differing perceptions can be within photography.. for me Medium Format film still trumps digital in pure image quality by a significant margin. I use a yashicamat TLR for street photography and given a good ISO 100 film it's quality is fantastic.

 

 

From memory the above was shot on Fuji 160ISO Medium format film, processed probably by Palm Lab's birmingham, shot with the aforementioned Yashicamat with an off camera flash ( not that you can actually mount an on-camera one!!)

[beast66606]

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)

 

No graininess due to the poor optics / sharp focus / auto focus / better aperture range / better glass / lighter

 

 

If you want to use old lenses, that's fine, but to generalise and claim that most are better is not correct.

 

I have taken one or two photos in my time, so I'm fully aware of the change in quality.

[beast66606]

Katier

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

 

Pentax are not the only manufacturers, those little known makes of Canon and Nikon also make cameras apparently

[Katier]

Pentax are not the only manufacturers, those little known makes of Canon and Nikon also make cameras apparently

 

*chuckles* oh for sure, he just asked for suggestions with a budget and I made a recommendation based on my knowledge of what the OP needs and his budget. Unfortunately neither Canon or Nikon do weatherproof cameras in his budget, which given he's primarily taking pictures outside is always something worth having incase the british weather catches him on the hop... He can carry on shooting without worrying if the rain will mess up his camera.

[beast66606]

OK - to save me getting annoyed and saying something I shouldn't I'll drop out this thread, whilst you undoubtedly have technical knowledge, you patently don't know as much as you think about other matters.

 

Do you SERIOUSLY believe that in nearly 40 years and over 0.5 million photos I haven't noticed the British weather and aren't aware of what cameras can / can't survive it, or what OTHER measures can be taken for only a few quid. Jeez.

[dave_long]

Beast

I value your input. I did mention earlier that I had been primarily looking at Canon and Nikon and I liked the Canon family of cameras. I hadn't looked at the Pentax range properly and wasn't aware of the models Katier had pointed out.

I think the old v new lenses you should agree to disagree as my old lenses are not useful I shall for now concentrate on new lenses.

Would or could you suggest something for me to have a look at in that price e range?

 

Best regards all

[Katier]

Given your tight budget you'll be looking at second hand lenses. Best bet is to look at the EXIF data of images which are from similar locations to where you shoot and look at the focal length shot at. This should give you a guide, but remember a shot on a crop frame body @ 200mm will be the equivalent of a full frame body at 300mm ( approximately ) so bear that in mind when trying to work it out.

 

Now personally I'd probably be looking at 3 focal lengths.

 

50mm, 100mm and 200mm ( which on a crop sensor work out at 50% more due to the effects of the crop). I's also be trying to get f2.8 or quicker so I can maximize flexibility. I prefer prime lenses because the IQ, especially with your budget, is WAY better than a zoom lens as many budget zooms are not all that good. (which unfortunately is where the legacy vs modern debate comes into play again)

 

Personally I would be shopping at KEH.com in the first instance and just looking through at lens specs that tickled your fancy then going to a forum dedicated to the camera you choose and asking the question.

[Suzie]

One of design parameters of a lens is sharpness of the image. A modern high resolution CCD (5Mp+) will need a much sharper lens than a 35mm film camera to work at full resolution, and to get that extra sharpness there will be a compromise on depth of field.

 

In the olden days you would select the camera and lens according to the size and resolution of the resulting image you were trying to get, and accept that the setting up of the larger format camera would be a lot of work and you would probably only take a single image, so it would need to be worthwhile. When you think that 35mm is about the same as 1Mp, medium format is about 5Mp, you can understand the difficulty of working with the much higher resolution cameras that are now commonplace with the large lenses required to enable them to get that resolution.

 

A modern camera does a lot for you to aid setting up and modern sensors are getting ever more sensitive, but with a high resolution setup in the low light of outdoors will make it difficult. Using an old lens will create a low resolution image on the sensor, but I think it will vary from camera to camera as to how the image will turn out, especially if you have a camera that tries to automatically sharpen an image using edge enhancement it perceives as slightly out of focus (which is how a camera will see an old lens that was never intended for such high resolution).

[Katier]

Thats not to say other brands aren't good, they will be but the two market leaders are there for a reason, and thats overall quality.

 

Just going to comment on this one line. The main reason isn't quality, it's marketting - nothing else. ALL manufacturers are producing cameras of excellent quality and ultimately the choice comes down to budget and what you want to do with your camera.

 

I want a camera that will take abuse and that has no issues with AF, so Pentax is a no-brainer. The low end Nikons and Canon lack in body AF motors, weather sealing and rugged construction. For someone doing studio work live view may be critical so a Pentax is hard to justify, or they are working on huge prints but can't run to a 645D (Medium Format Pentax DSLR) so want a full frame body, again currently Pentax is a no-go.

 

For the hobby/semi pro outdoors photographer though, who has no or little interest in video or live view the Pentax range is top of the tree - especially if prime lenses are also important.

[Katier]

Fair point on that one, I guess I missed a few critical words out. I kinda forgot about that end of the prime market although in my defense semi-pro's couldn't afford a 400mm f2.8 - the Nikon comes in at an eye watering £7000 while the Canon is no cheaper.. Fantastic lenses but way out of most peoples budget unless your in the profession.

 

The primes I was talking about were in the sub 150mm range which is where the Pentax range is second to none. 19 prime lenses between 14mm and 100mm (with a 200mm f2.8 and 300mm f4.0 above that.

 

I never pretend that Pentax currently can compete as a professional press or sports camera, it can't right now. As a professional landscape, urban or studio solution it most definitely can, however.

[Katier]

BTW I went back and looked at the EXIF data that the OP had posted and the two images I checked were both at 50mm so would seem something like :-

 

50mm f1.7

77mm f1.8

35mm f2.4

 

Or

 

Tamron 28-75 f2.8

[zarniwhoop]

I missed this topic until now. To me, the original pics look perfectly ok as a starting point. What I would suggest is that you need to do a little processing. At a minimum, the unsharp mask. I use the ufraw plugin for the gimp (free as in speech, as well as in cost) - works on my panasonic FZ45 as well as my Olympus E's. If you need to straighten things up, a little rotation.

 

My own pics tend to have a *lot* of processing - manipulated curves to bring out the detail, and usually the perspective tool - I no longer know which way is up (well, obviously I've got a rough idea, but my balance is poor and I have to use two sticks, which means I use the cameras one-handed when I'm out). What I can say for certain is that low ISO speeds on my panasonic and olympus are no better than middling speeds.

 

As for lens quality - most of them are rubbish. When I was a lad, people laughed at lenses with barrel distortion. Now, far too many W/A zooms show it. Unfortunately once you start to notice, it's very obtrusive, even in other people's pics and on TV. Fixable (filters -> lens distortion in the gimp), but an annoyance.

 

Enjoy your photography.

 

ĸen

[Trevellan]

It's interesting how differing perceptions can be within photography...

 

Which is one reason why I stayed out of this thread for so long - and am beginning to wish I'd stuck to my guns!

 

So, let me be clear. I am now semi-pro, meaning I must always aim for the highest quality possible. Currently, this is invariably achieved by using a 22mp pro-DSLR and a high-end 70-200 f2.8 zoom. And I repeat, it consistently outperforms my old Hasselblad kit, because there's very little noise, even at ISO1600. For transport work I'd have to use ISO400 film which clearly shows grain when scanned and pushed to the same magnification and there are other limitations. My usual lab charges over £20 to develop one film and produce a CD of hi-res scans, the latter being essential for me these days, making it an expensive option on a large shoot.

 

Bottom line: I love to use film, and if I only shot still life I might have missed the digital revolution altogether, but the immediacy and flexibility of digital for the majority of my current work makes it a no-brainer as my first choice.

 

As for the Dave, the OP, you will have seen that brand loyalty among photographers is a bit like being a football supporter, so please don't be confused by claims and counter-claims. All of the pro-snappers I work with have their own preferences according to budget, subject matter etc. I'm an unashamed Canon man, but I know other manufacturers produce superb gear and I've had many an amusing exchange of banter with Nikon users while setting up for events! Take your time choosing something that suits your needs. Right, I'm out of here...

[dave_long]

One option you have is a hi end second hand quality compact like the Canon G series. Brilliant little cameras and nowadays I use it most of the time.

 

Second hand DSLR will give you some very good options. The old adage of getting the lens right first still rings true, spend more on the glass and keep a good reserve for a decent body. A Canon 20D body will be around £150-£200, good robust chassis, and then look at a short zoom which will get you a good start point. I'd choose either a Canon or Sigma lens from my own experience in terms of quality through out the product. Once you get a good lens and body you can use them as the basis of your kit. Find a good camera shop, not a dixons type shop, and they'll often have someone who can walk you through the options. If starting again the only two brands I'd look at are Canon/Nikon due to quality/reliability/product range and durability that I've seen over the years. Thats not to say other brands aren't good, they will be but the two market leaders are there for a reason, and thats overall quality. For secondhand gear Mifsuds http://www.mifsuds.c...EOS_Bodies.html are good to deal with. For example here theres a 'scruffy' 1DMkII at £500. If its just cosmetic, thats a significant piece of hardware for a very good price. Probably not for you, but it shows what you can find with a good look around, theres also a 20D++ condition. A Mifsuds ++ cond is very good indeed!

 

Paul

Thanks for your input. I had originally looked in to the Canon range I did originally look at the 350-450D's, would you really go for the 20/30/40D range over the 400/450/500 series, second hand they tend to be similar in price? (Not that I'm basing the decision on price ranges)

 

Thanks for the link I hadn't seen that site before I shall have a good look around. Currently I'm just basing prices from ebay, whether I use ebay is another choice...

 

 

BTW I went back and looked at the EXIF data that the OP had posted and the two images I checked were both at 50mm so would seem something like :-

 

50mm f1.7

77mm f1.8

35mm f2.4

 

Or

 

Tamron 28-75 f2.8

 

Thanks I'll take a look into lenses like that. I tended not to use the zoom on the bridge camera too much as its harder to keep still and again raises the noise levels plus with the bridge cam you lose the ability to get the lower iso's and or the faster shutter speeds. I do like the idea of prime lenses. We'll see, I'll see what body I settle on first...

 

I missed this topic until now. To me, the original pics look perfectly ok as a starting point. What I would suggest is that you need to do a little processing. At a minimum, the unsharp mask. I use the ufraw plugin for the gimp (free as in speech, as well as in cost) - works on my panasonic FZ45 as well as my Olympus E's. If you need to straighten things up, a little rotation.

 

My own pics tend to have a *lot* of processing - manipulated curves to bring out the detail, and usually the perspective tool - I no longer know which way is up (well, obviously I've got a rough idea, but my balance is poor and I have to use two sticks, which means I use the cameras one-handed when I'm out). What I can say for certain is that low ISO speeds on my panasonic and olympus are no better than middling speeds.

 

As for lens quality - most of them are rubbish. When I was a lad, people laughed at lenses with barrel distortion. Now, far too many W/A zooms show it. Unfortunately once you start to notice, it's very obtrusive, even in other people's pics and on TV. Fixable (filters -> lens distortion in the gimp), but an annoyance.

 

Enjoy your photography.

ĸen

 

Hi Ken

Thanks for the input, I'm going to spend a good day hopefully in the next week or so to sit down and have a good go at post processing software, I do have ufraw on my laptop and it looks good to start with. I've done a few batch processess in panasonics silkypix, but have psp and gimp2 to try too. But alas I suspect that the quality that I'm looking for will only be had from processing images taken from a dslr.

I have said that I do like the photos I have taken, I have uploaded some photos that perhaps I may not have done straight away, to help illustrate my points and questions earlier in the thread, ie the images that look dark or the images that have not been rotated well etc.

 

Which is one reason why I stayed out of this thread for so long - and am beginning to wish I'd stuck to my guns!

 

So, let me be clear. I am now semi-pro, meaning I must always aim for the highest quality possible. Currently, this is invariably achieved by using a 22mp pro-DSLR and a high-end 70-200 f2.8 zoom. And I repeat, it consistently outperforms my old Hasselblad kit, because there's very little noise, even at ISO1600. For transport work I'd have to use ISO400 film which clearly shows grain when scanned and pushed to the same magnification and there are other limitations. My usual lab charges over £20 to develop one film and produce a CD of hi-res scans, the latter being essential for me these days, making it an expensive option on a large shoot.

 

Bottom line: I love to use film, and if I only shot still life I might have missed the digital revolution altogether, but the immediacy and flexibility of digital for the majority of my current work makes it a no-brainer as my first choice.

 

As for Dave, the OP, you will have seen that brand loyalty among photographers is a bit like being a football supporter, so please don't be confused by claims and counter-claims. All of the pro-snappers I work with have their own preferences according to budget, subject matter etc. I'm an unashamed Canon man, but I know other manufacturers produce superb gear and I've had many an amusing exchange of banter with Nikon users while setting up for events! Take your time choosing something that suits your needs. Right, I'm out of here...

 

Again I do appreciate the in put even if it has ruffled a few feathers. Without input from others up I feel as though if I look just at canon and nikon I feel more pulled to canon. Although Katier does put up a good case for Pentax and I have warmed a little to some of the cameras.

 

Thanks all for your input, sorry its taken me a while to reply today, a busy early shift today has kept me away from a computer to reply to you all.

[The Stationmaster]

Buy what you are comfortable with and which meets your performance needs and spec (or as near as you can afford to your spec) - it really is as simple as that. (As it happens I have had a fair degree of brand loyalty over the past 40+ years and have 3 of their film cameras (all slr) plus a digital slr. Some of their current lenses are not as good optically as some of the old ones because they are built down to a price and that is a common feature among all the big names from what i have heard from several photographers but their top end lenses are superb. verall these are cameras I am comfortable with, you are the only person who can make that choice for yourself so i won't tell you mine

[dave_long]

Paul thanks for the insight much appreciated.

 

While looking recently I have been drawn to the 30D and 40D. Personally the 30 over the 20 now at least (arguable when new) is slightly better plus I've read that the shutter on the 20 is significantly loud. There are a few improvements I like from the 30 to 40, the mpix sizes doesn't make too much difference here. I've been trawling Flickr looking at images taken with both and they both give very good results. More than enough for me to be happy with, even up to ISO800.

 

I may well still end up on ebay, I know it may be a gamble but I've been on ebay long enough to hopefully be confident of disregarding the rough end of the stick. fingers crossed. 40Ds with lenses can go between £300-400 whereas at dealers thats body only. ( 30Ds at £275-350 )

 

for balance I'm still keeping an eye on Pentax K20Ds, full wx proofing and high mpix is a plus. But I am tempted by the lure of the big C (stop laughing at the back)

 

regards

[beast66606]

I've had both a 10d and a 20d - my 20d had several new shutters due to the volume of use it received, from me and then my son, eventually it went in the bin (recycled) - the 10d remains as a spare for my spare.

 

I would recommend either of these, although not as quick (fps) as modern cameras the pictures were of good quality. Not had experience of the 30 or 40 as I moved up to higher spec models after the 20d.

 

hth

[dave_long]

Thanks

I've no hesitation in believing that any of that range will more than exceed my needs for the immediate future. I don't want to goto to the 50D as a few reviews have stated that they'd stretched the sensor of the 40D perhaps a little too far, plus I don't want the video. 6.5 fps on the 40D is still pretty decent, the 1600 iso limit isn't great but then I'm not going to be out in anything that needs more than 1600. Other than general size and weight I can't fault anything in the range. Just got to get my hands on one.

[dave_long]

Ok I think that I'm close on getting a 30/40D in next week or two. Possibly this will be body only. I know a few mentions of lenses have been made, but what would be a good place to start? I so far have been over the fence platform and bridge based for my photos so shouldn't require a large zoom lense.

[beast66606]

Buy the best lens you can afford - the 30/40 will magnify the focal length by 1.6 so a 50mm fixed becomes 75mm (give or take) - this can be useful, but it can also be annoying if you need to be close to the subject, so possibly a zoom would be a good start ?

 

This one is ok, and possibly could be found second hand ? (I've also used Martins cameras before, they were good with my purchases but no other connection)

 

http://www.martinsca...is-usm-45-p.asp

 

Shop around, prices vary, this lens can be found for less on eBay for example, and shops have special offers which vary.

 

A cheaper zoom

 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/NEW-CANON-EF-75-300mm-III-ZOOM-Lens-MARK-3-75-300-mm-/290714236065?pt=UK_Lenses_Filters_Lenses&hash=item43afeb34a1