Post Your Camera setup!

[ZokesPro]

Originally posted by mutz
@Zokes - LOL

Aside from a disposable camera and an old parallel scanner, that's my digi cam setup. Pathetic non?

[mutz]

Some artistic and imaginative people do fantastic stuff and effects with no more than what you have. They don't try to pull off sharp, perfect pics or graphics, but rather amusing, nostalgic, colorful, flash or impressionistic graphics. Some software required.

Here's one I did some years ago for everybody in a project after we finished some Smart commercials. Most of this is torn photo prints scanned in and then some warping in Corel. It may look like a pizza, but was meaningful for everybody who worked together.

[VJ]

my photo setup

Nikon D100 (6 megapixels link)
Nikon 24-85mm f/2.8-4 D IF (link)
Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 D ED-IF (occasionally, link)
B+H 72mm slim UV filter (link)
B+H 72mm slim ciruclar polarizer

3x Ridata 512 MB CF card (link)
Velbon VX501 tripod (predecessor to link)
Manfrotto QRA 323 (link)
Kipling Camera bag (link)
HiTi PhotoShuttle (4" x 6" / 10cm x 15cm dye sub photo printer link, currently writing a review for MURC )
Nikon Capture 3.5.1 NEF-editing software / remote control software

My usual workflow involves taking pictures in RAW-format (12-bit color), processing (as needed) them in Nikon Capture (exposure, curves, colour, whitebalance, ...).



Jörg

[HedsSpaz]

I'm stuck with film still (until my next pay check anyway ).

Right now I've got a Canon EOS Rebel Xs. Quite old camera these days, but it's served me well, for... gosh, 10 years? I bought it when I was 13, and I turn 24 in less than a month... so yeah, over 10 years, crazy.

Anyway, the accoutraments that go with it are:
Sigma f5.6 70-300
The crapy 35-80 elcheapo lens that came with the camera.
Speedlite 200E.
Carryed around in a nice Canon backpack style camera bag.

As of my next paycheck I'll be ordering a Canon EOS 10D and something to replace that awful 35-80 and possibly an EF f2.8 100mm macro. Not sure if the macro will fit in the budget yet though.

So yeah, I'm a photography geek and nothing less than a DSLR will ever satisfy me so I don't feel like dropping cash on a camera that I won't be happy with, which is why I've waited until DSLR's dropped into the range that my budget could stomach.

Ian

[seether]

HedsSpaz

Exactly my attitude - my thoughts are it's the SLR system that's more important than just pixel count anyday - I was given the D30 and it was good enough for me to stop using film in most cases - my 10D is only a couple of weeks old but so far I fully endorse it for you - if you get it you'll love it

For lenses you can always cheat regarding macro with a set of macro filters, but that 2.8 aperture is worth it - I wish I could afford to buy some big aperture lenses right now

[VJ]

Originally posted by seether
Exactly my attitude - my thoughts are it's the SLR system that's more important than just pixel count anyday - I was given the D30 and it was good enough for me to stop using film in most cases - my 10D is only a couple of weeks old but so far I fully endorse it for you - if you get it you'll love it

Yes, that is true. However, a higher pixel count is interesting when considering the altered workflow with digital: you tend to crop faster to get "the best" out of a picture. The higher resolution you start with, the higher it remains even after cropping.

BTW: if any of you guys is using a Leica R8 or Leica R9, then check out http://www.leica-camera.com ; they recently announced a digital back for those models, said to be released mid-next year. Price is estimated around € 4500 (digital module only !).

Jörg

[az]

Yes, that thing sounds REALLY REALLY interesting for Leica owners (even those who don't own a R8/9 yet, cause the lenses are also DAMN expensive).
Or, if you want to go DSLR and don't have a lot of lenses yet, wait for the Olympus E-1 with Four Thirds system.

Oh yes, I own a Minolta Dimage 7i



And a cheap-ish Hama Gamma Series Tripod. And a IBM Microdrive 1GB.

AZ

[VJ]

Originally posted by az
Yes, that thing sounds REALLY REALLY interesting for Leica owners (even those who don't own a R8/9 yet, cause the lenses are also DAMN expensive).
Or, if you want to go DSLR and don't have a lot of lenses yet, wait for the Olympus E-1 with Four Thirds system.

I'm a bit unclear about that four-thirds system. Is is just a marketing gimmick ? I mean, to what extent does this system differ from e.g. Canon with their 1.6 fov factor, or Nikon with their 1.5 fov factor. Just because Olympus says it will be the next standard, doesn't mean it will. Also, there are just a few lenses announced, whereas on the other hand, the current Canon/Nikon SLRs allready have vast ranges of lenses that work.

If Nikon were to say "we stick to the 1.5x factor and bring out dedictated lenses" - e.g. their DX-range, then what is the difference ?
(just wondering what all this four thirds is about)


Jörg

edit: oh, you shouldn't hot link from dpreview

[HedsSpaz]

seether,
You were given a D30?! You lucky SOB!!
Anyway, despite all the fud surrounding the mythical back-focus issue with the 10D I'm still way geeked out that I'm finally going to be able to get a good DSLR. I figure if it actually is a problem, and if I actually get one of the camera's that seems to exhibit the problem, then I'll have something done about it, easy enough solution.

As to the lenses, I do mostly close-up nature photography and I've managed to get by all these years simulating macro with my 70-300. It leaves something to be desired though. I'd really like to get Canon's 180mm macro, but I can't afford that. I'll probably end up getting the 50mm or 100mm macro instead. Probably ought to go to a local store and see if I can try all 3 hands on and see which one best suits my requirements.

Glad to hear you're liking the 10D, depending on Gateway's stock I should have one myself in less than a month.

Ian

[az]

VJ: The 4/3 system has several advantages: It's not manufacturer specific (Fuji and Kodak are in the 4/3 boat with Oly), cams and lenses can be smaller than tose with 35mm bodys, and, above all, digital sensors need the light to come at a 90° angle, film doesn't care. Film lenses aren't optimized for that, so manufacturers start to bring out Lenses like the DX. But, for the light beams to come at really 90°, you need a mount that's twice the size than the sensor (don't ask my why, physics...), which would mean an even bigger focal length multiplication factor, which would make wide angle lenses nearly impossible, or at least very, very expensive.

AZ

P.S.: Link to Minolta directly now

[moreau]

Olympus C-5050.

A bit overkill for my skill, perhaps, but my satisfaction has been maxed out.

It is a fabulous point-and-shoot using the predefined settings, but has enough customizability for me to grow into...

Cheers,
Dr.Moreau

[DukeP]

Minolta Dimage S404.
2x128mb CF.

Anybody got at matching spare underwater housing?


~~DukeP~~

[GuchiGuh]

FujiFilm FinePix F402
64 MB XD Picture Card, 16 MB XD Picture Card, 2x NP-4 Batteries, Carry Pouch, String Attached, Data Cable, Software Suite.
I also have a Old canon somewhere, but I cant find it. Oh and my dad has one of those really old ones...where you look from the top or something...

[VJ]

Originally posted by az
VJ: The 4/3 system has several advantages: It's not manufacturer specific (Fuji and Kodak are in the 4/3 boat with Oly)

Hmyes, but currently you have e.g. Sigma lenses for Nikon and Canon cameras as well; so apart from the mount, the lenses aren't camera specific. As there is allready a wide variety of lenses in both Nikon and Canon, I think the 4/3 will have to announce a lot of lenses to compete with it.

cams and lenses can be smaller than tose with 35mm bodys, and, above all, digital sensors need the light to come at a 90° angle, film doesn't care. Film lenses aren't optimized for that, so manufacturers start to bring out Lenses like the DX. But, for the light beams to come at really 90°, you need a mount that's twice the size than the sensor (don't ask my why, physics...), which would mean an even bigger focal length multiplication factor, which would make wide angle lenses nearly impossible, or at least very, very expensive.

Yes, that is true, but if Canon currently manages to pull out a full frame camera based on their exisiting lensmount, I'd think it would seem they have overcome the problem to some extent...? It could off course be that they implement a light-fall-off compensation in the camera hardware: Nikon has this in its Capture Software. It basically allows one to "brighten" the outer sides of the image (in a circular pattern); thus compensating for the fact that the edges of the imaging sensor have had less light fall on them due to the lenses. The effect this has is really minimal (the diameter of the circle beyond which the image will be brightened is dependant from the lens), one hardly sees it (apart from some pictures that are taken to stress this problem).

Furthermore, most people making the step to digital SLRs already have been shooting with an SLR an most likely have a number of (expensive) lenses. So they'd really like to be able to reuse them. Also, with the number of SLR (non-digital) still around, you do have some form of reassuring that you'll be able to buy the lens you are looking for in the future.

I just think the 4/3 is a very risky step to take, and it differs quite a lot from the approach other manufacturers are pursueing.


Jörg

[az]

Yes, 4/3 is a bold step for Olympus to make, and for the consumer, should he buy it.

BTW, 35mm lenses cap out at ~11mp, where the 1Ds is at the moment - Oly claim 4/3 lenses have twice the resolution potential. Oh, and yes, dSLRs likely have some electronic vignetting reduction, to compensate those effects to some extent. BTW, 4/3 lenses have all kinds of information stored in them (as well as user upgradable firmware in the cam, lens, and flash!), they tell the cam what kind of distortions they have (every lens has a little), which includes this info in the picture file, I think, so that software can autocorrect it with the optimal values for each lens. Maybe the cam does some kind of correction itself, too, I don't know. Oh, and the lens info is used to adjust the flash zoom motor, etc.

Bottom line, this is a system designed for digital, with less compromises than existing dSLR systems, which are basically aSLRs with digital backs. Sad though that Oly didn't keep their ingenious prism system instead of the mirror they had in the previous E cams.. it allowed you to use both the LCD and view finder for preview, as with a conventional digicam with EVF (only that it was no EVF).

AZ