Photography

Oh the nice local brick & mortar stores. I sure miss them. Here on my part of the globe they are as dead as a dodo. We have a couple, but they don't carry much inventory & don't have the knowledgeable staff of the old places that are gone.

Filters are like oil. You'll never get an agreement on what is best & why.

As to where I buy now, most of my camera gear was bought used. When a new camera comes out which is often in this digital age folks sell the old. You can get great cameras for bargain prices if you are willing to hunt them down.

That's enough rambling for now.

 

There is a great 'old time' camera store in Cincy. A lot of inventory, used equipment, and great advice. I have picked up some great deals there. BTW, if anyone likes Sony DSLR cameras, I have upgraded and have a Sony A350, with a couple of lenses and vertical grip for sale or trade.

 

I bought a Sony mirrorless about a month ago. An a6500 -- and a few lenses. Lots of firmware issues. They are being addressed a step at a time. I still use my D4 and Nikon lenses as my primary camera for work. The Sony is good enough for a backup, or to use in really tight places where my D4 just can't fit -- things like photographing engine stampings on a classic car.

The biggest issue I have with the Sony is batteries. I can shoot a few thousand frames on my D4 on a single battery. I only get a few hundred frames from on battery on the Sony.

CD

 

The DSLR is not even close to dead, IMO. At this point in time, I have not found a mirrorless that I would replace my D4 with -- even though I bought one for about 2,500 bucks with lenses, batteries and cards. It is my backup and special purpose camera. It isn't ready for primetime.

Even the Sony A7III isn't something I would consider to replace my D4. That is especially true considering the issues I've had with the firmware on my a6500.

And, like you, I like the traditional SLR viewfinder. I am more comfortable framing a composition with that, and my D4 has a built in diopter that can be adjusted to work with my personal eyesight.

I am actually pretty open to new technology, and am somewhat of an "early-adopter." But, as of right now, I'm going to stick to my DSLR as my moneymaker camera.

CD

 

I'll throw in to the filter convo a tad late. I always had a skylight filter on all my lenses not for the effect but primarily to protect the lens. A ding on a 5 dollar (they were back then) filter was a lot cheaper to get rid of than on a 300+ dollar lens.

 

I agree. If I am doing a studio photoshoot, in very controlled conditions, I can take my UV filter off. On the other end of the scale, when I'm shooting a race, and dust is everywhere, and I'm changing lenses too often to mess with lens caps, I wouldn't think of shooting without a good UV filter.

BTW, the rear element of any lens is the most Important element. A speck of dust on a filter in front of your lens will have an effect, but that same spec of dust on the rear element will have a MUCH bigger effect.

So, change your lenses quickly, and keep the rear element of your lens spotless. Same goes for your sensor on a digital camera. Change your lenses quickly, in as close to a dust-free environment as possible, and put a body cap on your camera body ANY time your camera does not have a lens on it.

CD

 

Mirrorless cameras eat batteries. Nom nom nom! I shoot with a couple of Fuji mirrorless cameras. I always have a couple of spare batteries in a pants pocket.

I switched from DSLR cameras a few years ago. I was given a Fuji to try & that was it, sold the Nikon's. For me the small form factor & great jpeg files won me over. Plus Fuji glass is top notch.

I'd love a Nikon D500, but as an old fart I don't want the bulk & weight it brings.

From what I understand Sony has a difficult menu system. Although I have no first hand experience. The new Sony A7III looks good, but I'm not changing systems again.

CD I think it will be a while until mirrorless equals a D4. Although I'm sure it will happen.

 

I had a terrible time with the Sony menu system, at first. I now have the basic understanding of it, but they definitely seem to like to make life more difficult than it needs to be.

But, all new cameras are more complicated than I would like.

CD

 

B + W is what I had purchased a few years ago. I was curious if they were still good. One negative note I have on the filter is that's hard to clean. Smudges really easy. I suppose I should get a UV lens to put over it as mentioned above.

 

I always have a clean microfiber towel (about 10X10 in size) in my camera bag. It is good for smudges and dust. I also use the lens hoods that came with my lenses, even if I don't need them for light issues. They are good at keeping fingers (and elbows, if I'm in a crowd) away from the glass.

The coatings used on lenses these days are amazing. They are very hard to scratch. A good filter as a "sacrificial" layer is still a good idea if you use your lenses out in the elements. I've done a ton of testing -- I test all of my lenses on a somewhat regular basis -- and I haven't found any reason not to use a high-quality filter.

CD

 

I have always used filters as a layer of protection as you do CD. I have killed 3 filters over the years. Although the 3 lens they were on survived impacts that would have smashed the front lens element.

A lens cloth, blower & Zeiss wipes are always in the bag. The wipes also work great for my bifocals.

Rainman I'm not sure I understand you. You want to put 2 filters on your lens? I never stack filters.

 

My wife used to use a Canon ELPH Powershot, she was quite good with it. Then she got he first iPhone & the Canon was abandoned for the phone camera. She has gotten quite good with it too & has never looked back.

I've been know to use the potato cam in my phone, but I find the 27mm focal length quite limiting. Yes I know I can zoom in with my feet, but my feet hurt. My wife loves the angle of the potato lens, but she has bought 2 additional lenses one wide & one tele to augment the one on her phone.

Not sure she would bother with filters. If she wanted she could take some of my filters & hold them up in front of the eye of the potato.

 

Anyone going to the Dragon want to take a drive to find some good, out of the ordinary, spots to photograph our cars and secic nature?

 

Pay all my expenses?

Okay, I'll assume that is a no.

For a long lens, look for areas where you can get a group of cars coming around a corner. The long lens will compress depth, so the cars will appear closer together. A curve in the road will allow you to see all of the cars, and if it is in the woods, you only see cars, road and woods. Looks good even if Dave.0 is holding everyone up.



Car-to-car. Hard to do. You need to have a camera that can shoot 5 FPS or better, and waste a lot of frames to get a handful of good shots. You must be comfortable with being out of control of the composition -- it will happen as it happens.The subject car is moving, and you are bouncing around -- while you trust your life to somebody driving on the wrong side of the road. Choose that driver VERY carefully.



Pan shot. Stand in a place where you can see the car coming and going and pan with it. Again, it helps if you can shoot at least 5 FPS and have a very steady hand.