Selfish rant: I WANT A DIGITAL SLR!

[bertha katzenengel]

In the grand scheme, this matters not one whit. That said, I am, although shit goes on in the world, entitled to have a life, and I know photographers will appreciate this.

I just took several photos of a beautiful dragonfly



and all are BLURRY! This was the best one!

I WANT A DIGITAL SLR! I am SICK of "auto-focus!"

aaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

/rant

[Deja Q]

1. Scanned film ALWAYS looks a bit soft...

Even on my expensive negative scanner (which negates all of the problems associated by the machinery in your developer's when it makes prints from the negs...) is soft.

Unsharp masking (a superior form of sharpening) does wonders and is a necessity. It's not film being crap (hardly!!!), it's part of the scanning process that's got to be done.

Screw digital SLR, BTW. You'd need to take several thousand pictures just to make up the cost of the DSLR camera + lenses, never mind the costs of the flash memory modules (fuck the dumbed-down "digital film" shit)...

Nevermind that a decent DSLR will cost you $2000 net (Digital Rebel XT from Canon, for sake of argument - all the other brands/models cost MORE) and even then I'd debate the quality of the camera.

Nevermind the problems inherant in digital cameras regarding the sensor, stuck pixels, dead pixels, long shutter exposures (Canon is known for having problems here), moire (Nikon wins out here in terms of selling overpriced TRASH that leaves a moire pattern...)...

Nevermind that while a film camera is dependent on film for the picture quality, you CANNOT change camera sensors. Technologically it could be possible, but no company will do it because it's less of a profit for them to do so. Making you upgrade the toy (whoops, camera) every year is much more profitable to them...

Nevermind that even a scanned print will have much greater color gamut and shadow detail than ANY digital camera on the market today...

And at 300DPI, an 8MP camera gets you 8x10" maximum. (don't believe the hype regarding "up to 20x30" or beyond. That's utter cowploppie.)

Digital is NOT READY for the pro market and the price for consumers or prosumers is still BEYOND ASININE.

[RagingInMiami]

2. You're wrong

Do you still listen to 8-track tapes?

[Deja Q]

7. Uh, do some research instead of your baseless insulting. & Here's a pic:

THAT is a film image, sorry to prove you wrong with some visual evidence. Scaled down of course (it's copyrighted so you can bet your sweet bippy I ain't postin' the full size version, which is just as crisp and JUST as detailed; with luck your monitor can show the detail within the deep orange segments of the newly-emerged monarch's wings...), but I get far better 13x19" prints of it than from ANY of my digital images frm my FIVE MEGAPIXEL CAMERA.

Now I could spend a day giving you every technical detail and every review and every user commentary out there to back up my statements. But like too many humans, you're too stubborn. Indeed, your baseless comment of "you're wrong" proves it.

I don't even know why I'm replying now. You didn't bother to say anything except "You're wrong" followed by your insult. That is beyond petty on your part. If you're going to debate, back up your accusations or don't bother. So YOU are the one that's wrong.

Sorry.

[RagingInMiami]

10. It's not insulting

It's just that unless you plan on going into the business of selling oversized prints, then you're really not going to see the difference.

Don't take it so fucking personal.

[DS1]

11. Toad jumps on every photo thread in the lounge to piss all over

DSLR, it's really quite psychotic.

[RagingInMiami]

12. I've noticed

You could have predicted his response after seeing the thread title.

[DS1]

14. and it sucks the joy of discussing photography right out when someone

shows up banging two pots together screaming about stuck pixels and cheap plastic pieces of crap toys. :eyes:

[RagingInMiami]

19. And that "Digital is NOT READY for the pro market "

Maybe five or six years ago, but not today.

[ET Awful]

21. National Geographic, arguably a magazine with some of the BEST

photography around contains a huge percentage of digital shots.

[RagingInMiami]

22. And they are extremely picky about the photos they run

[ET Awful]

24. Exactly my point. n/t

[DS1]

29. Here's some more crap digital shots

oh, and digital cameras are useless at night, and don't pick up any color

[ET Awful]

30. Damn those people anyway, don't they know digital is no good? n/t

[DS1]

32. Obviously not purists

It's only a true photo if you have to rescan it every time a new scanner comes out with a higher dpi.

[bertha katzenengel]

35. DS1

Christ, if I'd known that, I might not have bothered. :shrug:

[ghostsofgiants]

3. How much did you drop on your negative scanner?

[ET Awful]

4. What a pile of bologney.

Let's start with the Rebel XT, it can be had for under a grand easily. It doesn't even approach $2,000 unless maybe you're talking Australian dollars. Pentax, Olympus and Nikon all make models that can be had as a kit with a lens for under $1,000.

Costs of flash memory? For under $200 I can carry enough media to store over 400 6mp shots in my shirt pocket. It's reusable nearly an infinite number of times. It doesn't require me to pay someone else to develop it later, I don't waste money processing a less than acceptable shot, and I don't have to buy more every time I shoot.

Second, if it's not ready for the pro market, you might want to start talking to the majority of pros who are in the process of or have already switched to digital. If you pick up any magazine on the shelf today, there are far better than even odds that the cover shot was taken with a digital. For example . . . http://www.livingroom.org.au/photolog/news/professional_photographers_switch_to_digital.php

As to your utter nonsense about moire, I have been shooting non-stop with a Nikon for several months and have NEVER seen a moire pattern with one exception, shooting a brightly lit speaker grill to intentionally create one.

Sorry, but you're wrong. BTW, you can get an 8x10 print out of 6 megapixels with no issues whatsoever, 8 isn't required.

If you're going to give advice, give it based on experience, not what you read somewhere else.

[Deja Q]

15. Okay, prepare for a shock or two:

Re: Film vs digital

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmgoingaway.htm

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/filmdig.htm
(it gets fun when you scroll down to the paragraph starting with "Ignore me. Just look here for why a magazine like Arizona Highways simply does not accept images from digital cameras..."

As for moire, I'll ignore the fact I've seen it with my own eyes - enough websites will do the work for me:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=nikon+moire+d70&btnG=Search

If moire is nonsense, WHY THE FUCK DO ALL OF THOSE GOOGLE RESULTS COME UP THEN? Doesn't look like nonsense to me - apart from your puny and insulting response, that is.

And because I'm nice enough not to borrow bandwidth, look up http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/nikon/d70-review/ and scroll down - you'll see a prime example of moire. If YOU bother to LOOK around long enough, you'll see MANY more examples and - GASP - read up on people who have used the thing and think it's a P.O.S.

I did a shitload of research on Nikon and Canon (not the XT but the previous Digital Rebel) and kept an eye on repetition from comments that professionals AND USERS said. I stand by what I've said.

And, again, 300DPI is 300DPI. Look more closely at those enlargements and the detail won't be there the larger you get. And as scanning technology improves, I can scan my negs at higher resolutions and get higher quality once new models come out. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO ENLARGE A DIGITAL IMAGE AND GET THE SAME LEVEL OF DETAIL. I've tried and 13x19" prints made from a 5MP camera on a EPSON STYLUS PHOTO 2200 look somewhat jagged. That's because the native print-worthy resolution of that camera is 5MP (about 6x8") Anything larger is STRETCHING the image and as such reducing detail quality. Hell, you can print a 3MP picture on 11x14, but it will look far worse than a 5MP. Unless you're blind, of course...

But everybody has their own mindsets. And when I am attacked, it doesn't matter what I say or how I say it or how much EVIDENCE I include. I've seen the same type of results from people on both sides. Fuck it all.

[ET Awful]

16. Do you know anything about Ken Rockwell?

Are you aware that 1/2 the time he posts "reviews" of things he's never seen, let alone used? He bases reviews on reading specs.

Tell you what, go here and see what actual photographers have to say about Ken Rockwell http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1034 do a search or just ask about the guy.

Perhaps if you did some research on your sources you'd have some real knowledge.

Once again, have you USED a digital SLR, or are you simply spouting what you've read from people as biased as yourself? I personally HAVE used them. I speak from experience, you . . . don't.



I don't see any moire. Do you?

[DS1]

17. Not to mention that later on in the review

he talks about getting lower grain on a DSLR than ASA 50.

Besides, let's get real for a moment. The original poster is someone who's primarily taking cat pictures and nature shots. Can't say I've seen many metallic grills in the woods :shrug:

[ET Awful]

20. Unless you're near a Freeper convention . . . metallic grills everywhere

on their chromed SUV's :)

[bertha katzenengel]

65. LOL I missed this last night, ET

I live in a rural (purple) county - it is the land of tricked-out pick-up trucks + hunting . . . :rofl: you don't know how right you are.

[miss_kitty]

26. What a beautiful picture

when will the photography contest have a kitty theme?

:hide:

[ET Awful]

27. Thanks :)

I don't know, but it would be a fun contest :)

[bertha katzenengel]

67. When ET, Lorien, or anyone else who posts cat pictures wins it.

Can't wait! :bounce:

(actually they may already have won it - I don't keep up)

[bertha katzenengel]

34. My god, ET... I don't think I've seen that one before. That is

fantastic! See? See what I'm talking about?! AAAAHHHHHHHH!

:7

[ET Awful]

41. Thanks :)

That one was more about perfect lighting and timing than anything else.

[bertha katzenengel]

33. These aren't scanned. These are digital photos, taken with a

Nikon Coolpix 885. I have never had any problems with it. The only problem I have ever had with any camera - film or digital - is autofocus. My eyes are better.

And please don't tell me "screw this" or "fuck that." You know what YOU want or like, HT. Please don't presume to tell me what I know or like.

Moreover I'm not interested in what the market says or does. I know what kind of photos I like to take and I know what I want with which to take them.

But never quit posting your opinions! :hi:

[ET Awful]

5. They're very nice to have Bertha, but one caveat . . .

You can easily end up with the same results shooting with an SLR.

D-SLR's are also autofocus (unless you turn it off). The key isn't so much in the focus as in camera motion.

If you don't require all the versatility of an SLR, you may be better off getting a higher level non SLR digital camera with some form of image stabilization (look at some of the Minoltas out there for examples). You could probably save money by doing that if you don't require all the features of an SLR.

Even with an SLR, I've shot many, many photos that are blurry or unacceptable for other reasons.

I won't feed you the nonsense about a better camera not making you a better photographer, because I feel that in many ways it does. But I will tell you that for many people, a good higher end consumer level digital camera is a better option. Especially if you don't want to carry various lenses, flashes, etc. with you.

[bertha katzenengel]

37. Thanks, ET.

I don't have much education in photography, but I know what I like to shoot and I am very good at it. Thanks for the info about image stabilization. The praying mantis photos I posted yesterday - the best ones were taken when I put the camera down on the block wall.

And in all humility, the only thing that can make me a better photographer for my purposes, besides eliminating this blur, is education. I'm no pro, but I can take some good pictures. :blush:

[ET Awful]

40. Of course, some form of support helps too, a tripod, or lacking that

something to brace yourself against as you take the picture.

If you don't have really good light to work with, you need a slower shutter speed, and with slower shutter speeds, the slightest motion will cause a blurry photo.

[bertha katzenengel]

46. Yeah, well I know it. The end table was the difference here:

I loved the natural light in the room, and knew I'd never get a good photo without a platform. Turns out it took a two-second exposure. I couldn't believe Harry sat still that long. Think he knew? ;)

(Unfortunately I'd forgotten to change the settings for a super-fine image so I can't do what I intended with the photo. Oh, well.)

[ET Awful]

48. Damn, he must have been VERY still for a 2 second exposure :)

I'd probably notice a little blure if the image was larger, but still . . . that's one patient (and handsome) kitty :).

[bertha katzenengel]

49. Well, I knew I could get him to sit still if I said "Mouse?" He LOVES

getting a new toy mouse, and he will sit up and be still for just a second or two before he starts wailing and making biscuits while turning tight little circles on the carpet in anticipation. Just after the camera snapped shut, he jumped down. Of course, I had to give him a mouse . . . .

Is it handsome you want? Here's the photo my av is based on. I love my Harry.

[ET Awful]

51. He's quite the looker

I don't know if he's a match for Quinn :evilgrin:, but he's a good lookin' boy :).

[bertha katzenengel]

53. Well, you've seen Quinn's match, haven't you?

And with that, I'm off to bed. Thanks for the discussion. You know I'll bend your ear on photo issues in the future... if you don't mind. :)

'night, all!

[ET Awful]

54. Not at all. Any time, feel free to PM if you don't want to

start a whole thread :)

[bertha katzenengel]

55. ... or

get blasted? ;)

NOW i'm off. TTYL.

[Sabriel]

6. We've never had that problem with the F5

What are you using? The old 8008s had that problem.

[bertha katzenengel]

36. Nikon Coolpix 885

purchased in 2002. . . .

[Deja Q]

8. Here is a pic that I had scanned...

Yes, film CAN be scanned and still look good. I'm sorry some other people impugned my integrity and I generally don't duplicate my responses...

I regret not putting this up originally, but I can post NUMEROUS examples of film photos...

I even did a poll on DU a few months' back, asking people if the image was film or digital. (it was film). By and large, everybody selected "digital". :rofl:

[RagingInMiami]

9. This is why digital is better

You're able to instantly see your photos. You can take 300 photos of the same subject, experimenting with different settings and angles, and erase the ones you don't like.

And for that, it makes you a much better photographer.

[bertha katzenengel]

38. That's the big advantage. Honestly, I kinda miss film. But it's far, far

FAR too expensive. I'm not too nostalgic for it. I could never make the kind of photos I make with film because I owe a lot of my really good ones to repetition.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

13. I'm with you, Bertha..I want one as well..and I'm going to have one...

soon...

I'm getting Nikon's D50...I've heard very good things about it from one friend of mine who is a professional photographer...

Also, the New York Times had an excellent article some time back that talked about its strengths and weaknesses...

But for me, the kicker is that I already have a Nikon film camera, and the lens on that camera is compatible with the new D50...

So I'll probably have it soon...in the next month or so...I can't wait!

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

[brentspeak]

18. You can get a Canon Digital Rebel (first generation) pretty cheap

The Rebel has recently been upgraded to the Digital Rebel XT, which means that the first generation Rebel is selling quite cheaply on ebay.

I've got a Rebel, and it's pretty good. There's even a software hack that you can download from the web which unlocks a lot of hidden features.

[bertha katzenengel]

39. Why do they hide features? Or do they not do it on purpose?

You know what I'd really like to know is if there are any DSLRs out there with K-mounts. I'd like to avoid buying new lenses....

[ET Awful]

42. You're in luck :) . . . The Pentax *ist DS is very reasonably priced AND

it can use K-mount lenses. . . it might require an adapter, but I know it can use them.

You would probably sacrifice some of the metering capabilities of the camera and a few other modern features that require TTL abilities, but for doing manual shooting, it would fit the bill nicely.

It also has one of the best viewfinders (meaning large, clear and bright) I've ever seen on a SLR (film or digital).

[bertha katzenengel]

43. Woo hoo!

Well, I'm not sure I want to sacrifice anything. But still... ooh, I'm drooling. . . .

Let me ask your opinion: if you could buy a camera that would allow you to use your existing lenses, but you'd sacrifice some of the new camera's capabilities, OR you could buy a camera and have it just as it was meant to be, but had to buy new lenses -- what would you do?

[ET Awful]

45. Well, the thing with the Pentax is that it can use any Pentax lens old

or new. So if you bought it, you could use your lenses you currently have and gradually (as the need or desire arose) replace them or complement them with new ones.

If I had good glass already, I'd probably want to continue using it. Knowing that I could buy other lenses as time went on and maintain compatibility would be a huge motivator to keep on using what I had.

I'd probably buy a decent light meter to go with the camera if I was using older lenses that wouldn't fully utilize the metering in the camera itself.

Check out the reviews though, the *ist DS isn't a bad camera, especially for the price (under $700 with the kit 18-55 lens).

On edit: Here's a review http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxistds/

It appears that they now have a DL model as well but I'm not familiar with it at all.

[brentspeak]

61. Canon locks features on the Rebel that are on their

higher priced cams, like the D-20. Fortunately, some ingenious person figured out a way to hack into the Rebel.

[Maestro]

66. Oooh!

I'm interested. Please point me to the hack.

[Maestro]

68. Come back Brentspeak.

Point me to the hack. ;)

[auntAgonist]

23. Hi Bertha, great picture!

I have an Olympus Camedia C-50 zoom and I love it. It's all I need for the picture taking I do.

I used to have a Pentax with all the lenses you can imagine, but I left it behind in another life :shrug: like so much I should have taken!

thanks for sharing your picture, it is so cool!


:yourock: K!

[bertha katzenengel]

50. TY, K.

Wouldn't you know, when I married Mrs. V. I learned she had the exact same camera? LOL

Thanks for the recommendation. :)

[maveric]

25. I recently splurged on a Canon EOS 20D. And I love it!

A windfall came my way so I spent $1,600.00 on the camera of my dreams.
I have no regrets!

[ET Awful]

28. Great choice :)

It's a great camera.

I don't plan on upgrading for a good while. When I do, I'm going to try and get my hands on a used Nikon D2X.

For now, I'm more than happy with my moire-free D-70 :).

[BamaGirl]

31. Aww, doesn't look blurry

:hug: But I can relate to the rant. I don't like auto-focus, so use my old manual Minolta. I can't afford a digital slr I'd want to have lol.

[bertha katzenengel]

52. BamaGirl

:hi: Thanks -- and I have a question for you. I have heard about stars falling on Alabama. In a song or two, on the 'Bama license plate -- what is that about, if you know? Thanks! (yes, I'm hijacking my own thread)

[BamaGirl]

59. Bob Dylan song

the only song I know of, and it says it on our tags (also Heart of Dixie). Why? No idea lol. I'm from Ga--I don't understand half what they do 'round here lol. :P


Cross the Green Mountain

I cross the Green Mountain
I sit by the stream
Heaven blazing in my head I
I dreamt a monsterous dream
Something came up
Out of the sea
Swept through the land of
The rich and the free

I look into the eyes
of my merciful friend
And then I ask myself
Is this the end?
Memories linger
Sad yet sweet
And I think of the souls in heaven who will be

Alters are burning
The flames far and wide
the fool has crossed over
from the other side
They tip their caps
from the top of the hill
You can feel them come
All brave blood do spill

Along the dim
Atlantic line
The rapper's land
lasts for miles behind
the lights coming foreward
and the streets are broad
all must yield
To the avenging God

The world is old
The world is great
Lessons of life
Can't be learned in a day
I watch and I wait
And I listen while I stand
To the music that comes
from a far better land

Close the eyes
of our Captain
Peace may he know
His long night is done
The great leader is laid low
He was ready to fall
He was quick to defend
Killed outright he was
by his own men

It's the last day's last hour
of the last happy year
I feel that the unknown
The world is so dear
Pride will vanish
And glory will rot
But virtue lives
and cannot be forgot

The bells
of evening have rung
there's blasphemy
on the end of the tongue
Let them say that I walked
in fair nature's light
And that I was loyal
to truth and to right

Serve God and meet your full
Look upward beyond
Beyond the darkness that masks
the surprises of dawn
In the deep green grasses
and the blood stained woods
They never dreamed of surrendering
They fell where they stood

Stars fell over Alabama
And I saw each star
You're walking in dreams
Whoever you are
Chilled as the skies
Keen as the frost
And the ground's froze hard
And the morning is lost

A letter to mother
came today
Gunshot wound to the breast
is what it did say
But he'll be better soon
He's in a hospital bed
But he'll never be better
He's already dead

I'm ten miles outside the city
And I'm lifted away
In an ancient light
That is not of day
They were calm they were gloomed
We knew them all too well
We loved eachother more than
we ever dared to tell

[hyphenate]

44. I just got a Minolta Dimage A200

and while it's not an SLR, it's a top of the line model, at 8.3MP. It has a feature which helps to control a blurred image. I think it's called the "Anti-shake" feature.

I researched it quite a lot before I bought it. If you wants specs, try http://www.epinions.com for some info.

[ET Awful]

47. Exactly what I was referring to earlier.

I had an earlier generation of that camera (the A1) prior to getting my D-70.

Minolta makes some great cameras (and they have one of the best image stabilizer features going, being that it's mounted on the sensor instead of the lens, they've carried that over to their D-SLR line so you have image stabilization with any lens you chose).

[Maestro]

56. Get one! (Not for bandwidth challenged)

I love my Digital Rebel XT! Here are some examples.







OMG! It's Maestro.











And a few nature shots

[ET Awful]

57. The one of your daughter hanging over the edge of the pool is priceless

that smile is a winner :)

As to the emu - ain't emu's grand?



or is that a rhea?



:)

[Maestro]

58. I gotta get a new lens!

Those are some incredible close-ups! I know you use the Nikon so your lens won't fit my camera, but I really need to get one with more magnifying power. Great shots! I thanks for the kind words about my daughter. That is one of my favorite pics as well.

[brentspeak]

62. The emu and frog pictures are especially well done

[Maestro]

63. Thanks -nt

[bikebloke]

60. I'm about to go digital

There are some good prosumer digital cameras out there. A DSLR will cost you an arm and a leg - plus you'll have to buy lenses.

For 20 years, I carried an Olympus point & shoot in rougher adventurous travelling, backpacking and bike trekking. Despite its limitations, I was able to make some great photos. More advanced photography was always out of reach due to expense of equipment and processing. Now I can learn.

I'm about to get a Panasonic FZ5. The office got one based on my research. I've had a half second of international fame when I was credited for a photo we published. The image quality is excellent.

Though it all depends on what you want. Other brands are loaded with extra features (the retractable fishing rod and cappuccino maker are must-haves for some folk).

[progmom]

64. me too!!!

very very much so.

:hi: