Acousticologist Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Anyone take pictures here, know of a good camera? I've seen some sexy pictures of guitars on this forum.... Aside from the guitar itself -How much of the beauty is in the camera, rather than the photographer's eye? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowdiddley Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 I use a Nikon d-3000, it's perfect for what I need. Thing to remember is you can take a bad photo with a great camera but its impossible to take a great photo with a crappie camera. My wife just got a Nikon S-6000 and it takes really good photos. Less than $150 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SGSpecialguy Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Ive been a photographer for many years myself, it depends on what you want to do and what your budget is, do you want a Point and shoot? do you want a DSLR ? Personally, I use a DSLR and LOVE them over the PAS cameras, I use a Canon 40D with several Canon and Sigma lens', if you have the funds for a DSLR you cant go wrong with either Canon or Nikon but I like the Canon lens line and the variety of choices better then I do the Nikon line. I shoot alot of Landscapes, heres an example,, 1t by jaharris1001, on Flickr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbreslauer Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Anyone take pictures here, know of a good camera? I've seen some sexy pictures of guitars on this forum.... Aside from the guitar itself -How much of the beauty is in the camera, rather than the photographer's eye? my advice is to look for a camera with long optical zoom. that way you can get the lens further away, and them zoom in to minimize flash effect on your image. the Canon SX series has a 12x optical zoom, and is not too expensive. i have a Canon G9, but its long discontinued. there is a G12 now... i am not a photographer to say the least, so for me it's all about being able to capture details without blur or light effecting the picture. Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Versatile Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Since digital began to take over image making from about 10years ago The number of 'designer' snapshot cameras has proliferated Capable of excellent quality and fully downloadable etc And the big names like Nikon, Canon, Mamiya, Olympus all have ranges from keyring up to full pro cameras Zoom lenses are commonplace at all levels now For a given number of pixels it all comes down to the size/quality of the lens I saw a really nice Nikon recently with GPS built in So one can take a pic with co-ordinates to pinpoint the location for Google Earth etc. How Cool Is That? V Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Aside from the guitar itself -How much of the beauty is in the camera, rather than the photographer's eye? You can use almost exactly the same analogy as for a guitarist with a guitar. Give Jeff Beck a Squier 'Affinity' Strat and he'd still be able to play pretty much exactly like Jeff Beck. Once you get above a certain basic quality level (say about $100 for a compact - $450 for a high-pixel-count DSLR) any extra money you spend will make very little difference. A camera is a means to capture information. Nothing more. It's a tool. For more money you may get more features but it's unlikeky you'd ever really use most of them. The brain and eye are far, far more important. P. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SGSpecialguy Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 You can use almost exactly the same analogy as for a guitarist with a guitar. Give Jeff Beck a Squier 'Affinity' Strat and he'd still be able to play pretty much exactly like Jeff Beck. Once you get above a certain basic quality level (say about $100 for a compact - $450 for a high-pixel-count DSLR) any extra money you spend will make very little difference. A camera is a means to capture information. Nothing more. It's a tool. For more money you may get more features but it's unlikeky you'd ever really use most of them. The brain and eye are far, far more important. P. well said Pippy, I knew a nurse that wanted to get into photography, a friend of hers suggested she buy a Canon 5D Mark II which is about $3000.00 JUST for the body, then she spent about another $3000.00 on "L" lens' which is Canon's top of the line lens' and she got SO frustrated with that equipment because she couldnt take any better photo's then with her point and shoot, but the fact of the matter is it was HER and NOT her gear, she just DIDNT have a photographer/artistic eye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Searcy Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 I use junk cameras that I get at the pawn shop. This picture was taken with a $50 Nikon Coolpix camera. I think the key is really setting up the shot. I never use a flash and try to take my pictures in indirect sunlight whenever possible. Outside on an over cast day is the best. Same guitar, same camera taken inside with florescent light. Suck City... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigh Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Give me a Nikon F & I'll be happy. Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveinspain Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 I have a Leica D-LUX 4 digital camera.... Amazing camera, takes great shots, is very compact, has a very big viewing screen and even does HD video. Pricey but well worth it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SGSpecialguy Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 mmm,, Leica as you said,, not cheap though, but certainly quality glass !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surfpup Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 I guess the first thing you have to decide is whether you want the convenience and small size of a point and shoot. If you don't mind a larger camera, a digital single lens reflex DLSR will certainly improve the quality of your pictures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Pippy and I both take pictures as all or part of our living, as I recall... I've always said after a few years at it that, give me a grocery store $5 camera I'll get you a publishable photo. It may not be what I'd prefer, but it'll be publishable. Me, I've mostly worn out Nikons, generally the lower-cost SLR variety. After digital came in, first the D1, then variations. The D70 isn't, I believe, still in manufacture but I've worn out one and am halfway to wearing out a second one and the shutters in these things are, I believe, much "stronger" than in the olden days because "we" tend to shoot a lot more with a big chip than when we hadda carry film. Ditto Canon. The difference tends to be whether you were brought up with one or the other. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 ...well said Pippy... Well, thank you! Give me a Nikon F & I'll be happy. Craig Ah...the Old Days! How well I remember them! I grew up (as a photography student) using an old - even then! - Nikon F. Funnily enough I've still got a case with 3 Nikon F's (two with Phot FTn finders); an F2 Phot and all the lenses between 24 - 200; a Leica M2 with a few lenses; and so on. I haven't opened the case in about 6 years... I have a Leica D-LUX 4 digital camera.... Amazing camera, takes great shots, is very compact, has a very big viewing screen and even does HD video. Pricey but well worth it... Yup. That's what I've promised myself for a holiday camera some time soon. I've used the D-Lux 3 on occasion and they really are beautiful things (at the moment I'm lugging around a Canon EOS 7D with battery grip and, frankly, it's a pain in the butt outside the studio). ... The difference tends to be whether you were brought up with one or the other... And I agree 100% with Milo. If you were brought up with Nikon, stay with them. Believe me; I did otherwise (it was essential, unfortunately) and I still get everything on the Canon back-to-front. P. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Boss lady here has a dslr Leica that seems to give her exceptional quality and I think the "kit" was only around 6-700 USD. Pippy... as for film cameras sitting in a case for years... I resemble that remark. I also find the change in slr lenses incredible given that some of my old ones don't seem to be very forward compatible as they'd been for decades. By the way, the shots I did of my old Harmony archtop electric - I started a thread a week or so ago on it - were just D70 snapshots, literally; no real effort for special lighting or anything. Even today's "cheapie" DSLR lenses tend to be quite good compared to the olden days. Although... some of the old glass was nice. I actually enjoy the fact that I can "chimp" photos when I play some games such as shooting traffic from inside the Jeep while driving, or when I'm messing with flash lighting a bit. Chimping? It's when you shoot a pix, then hit the button to show what's in the camera and go, "whoooo. whooo whooo...." <grin> m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Versatile Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 A lot of pics nowadays are purely for social e-mailing and perhaps the odd internet post like this So excess quality can be wasted Cheap can be very cheerful V Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanvillRob Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 My recommendation is that if you're looking for a camera....smile! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bschory Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 I have a Canon T1i which I really dig. Prosumer grade SLR, for under 1k. Very versatile, takes great pictures. It also has let me build up a lens collection that I can continue to use if I ever upgrade to a nicer camera. Here's an example pic I took of my the lead singer in my friend Ken's band, Force Fed Lies: photo by bschory on Flickr And a gratuitous pretty shot: photo by bschory on Flickr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 Hey Pippy... Odd question but... <grin> I never took personal photos until a little pocket camera in the early 90s. Now I don't have a baby digital so I'm either working and take the dslr or ... leave it in the Jeep. Same there? Of course... anywhere within 100 miles or so has the potential of "work," so it's always there in the Jeep, at least. I almost never take "personal" pix. I think the ones of that old Harmony were the first in about two years. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WahKeen Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 And remember not to shake the Polaroid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Hey Pippy... Odd question but... <grin> m PM on it's way, Milo. P. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badbluesplayer Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 My advice would be this. If you want to take real high quality photos, get a digital SLR. If you have one of those little things with the little lens, forget it. You'll always be taking second class photos. The new low end digital SLR's all have a point and shoot mode. That's what I use like ninety percent of the time. The little cameras are better than they used to be but they just don't take very good pix. Like the pic of the red hollowbody. Nice pic, but I can tell it was taken with a cheap camera. Here's a couple of guitar photos taken with my low end digital SLR - a Nikon D50: You be the judge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Searcy Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Here's a shot with an other pawn shop junker. This one is an old Kodak Easy Share. This is the type of shot I usually have to take and I tend to look for interesting light setting to shoot in. I really think it depends on what you're after. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 ... If you have one of those little things with the little lens, forget it. You'll always be taking second class photos. The little cameras ..... just don't take very good pix. With all due respect, badbluesplayer, that's all nonsense. I don't mean the following in a 'pulling rank' way in the slightest, but... I've been working as a professional photographer in London since '87 so I've a fair idea of how good a camera has to be in order to obtain good snaps. I could take pictures with that Leica D-LUX which would be good enough for most clients' needs, believe me. It really is down to the user. P. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badbluesplayer Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 With all due respect, badbluesplayer, that's all nonsense. I don't mean the following in a 'pulling rank' way in the slightest, but... I've been working as a professional photographer in London since '87 so I've a fair idea of how good a camera has to be in order to obtain good snaps. I could take pictures with that Leica D-LUX which would be good enough for most clients' needs, believe me. It really is down to the user. P. O.K. then, the advice from the professional photographer is to buy a low end camera. Fine, you're the pro. But then again, you could take a photo with a pinhole camera and it would be good. You probably think that 1960 Leica viewfinder cameras are the best. Right? Nonsense? I doubt it. I've been a photographer since about 1974. Big Deal. I've been playing guitar for forty years and I still suck. What does that say? Nothing. I can play an Epiphone guitar better than Joe Blow can play a Gibson. Does that mean that the Epiphone is better? Talk about nonsense!! I'm an engineer and I can multiply with a slide rule. So what? I don't go around recommending people use a slide rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.