photo gear ?

[evaddek]

Hi
new to this site and I'm sure its here someplace but could'nt find it .
Was wondering what type of photo gear most of you use, lens type ect.
thanks
dave

[tree68]

My 35 is a Pentax K body, with a 50mm, a 30-70mm zoom and a 70-210mm zoom (I think). I also carry a 2x teleconverter. I usually shoot 200 ASA unless the situation warrants otherwise. I used to shoot mostly slides, but with the scanner the prints are better.

Don't use the 35mm as much anymore, though. I've gotten great results for most of my photography with my Sony Mavica 1.2 megapixel. It's not "top-of-the-line" but it does a great job for what I usually shoot.

[jchnhtfd]

Canon Rebel 2000, 38 - 125 zoom for some work; Canon A70 digital for almost everything I do; my son uses a Canon D1 digital SLR with either 50 - 200 IS zoom or 125 - 600 IS zooms. I use professional Ektachrome slide film, ASA 100, in the Rebel. Digital pictures are recorded in .jpg format for the A70 or .raw format for the D1, and processed using Adobe Photoshop pro. The image stabilization (IS) is worth it's weight in gold with the longer lenses!

[Anonymous]

Holy Cow!!! Nice equipment!! I just use a Kodak DX3900 Digital camera. It's 3.1 Mp. I use Adobe Photoshop Elements to edit the photo as well as create fast web galleries.

I can't afford the super cameras.

[Anonymous]

I take it most of you are using digital camera's now?

I was thinking about getting a nice camera in the next little while (just for railfaning), I suppose digital is the only way to go now?

[tree68]

QUOTE: Originally posted by macguy

I take it most of you are using digital camera's now?

I was thinking about getting a nice camera in the next little while (just for railfaning), I suppose digital is the only way to go now?

I'd say that for most of the stuff the average railfan is going to shoot, a digital is probably perfect. No dyes to fade, etc, and digital is very portable. Want me to see a favorite picture? Press "send". Get a junk shot? You can delete it. (Just make sure it's not one of those shots that you'll kick yourself for deleting 20 years from now!) With a digital projector and PowerPoint you can share them with your friends. Want to crop the shot? Shareware programs work almost as well as the high end stuff.

On the other hand, there are still some things that will be better on film. If you are into panning shots, for instance, a cheap 35 will be much less expensive that the digital you will need for the same shot. I won't be getting rid of the 35mm for quite a while.

[edblysard]

It was a 30 year old plus Cannon F1, mixed bag of zoom and fisheye lens.
Still use it every once in a while.
Now its a Minolta Dimage Hi7 digital SLR, 28 mm to 200 mm lens, with zoom and macro built in and digital zoom on top of that.
One camera, one tripod, versus 25 or 30lbs of film camera stuff....
Still, that old Cannon is one tough camera, I wouldnt dare do to the digital camera some of the things I did to that old steel camera.
The cost of film and processing keeps me using the digital, and the ease of the digital to make your own photos, along with the lesser expense.

Ed

[Modelcar]

...For the most part I use my Cannon EOS Elan 7e 35mm with eye control focus and 28 to 200 zoom lens and sometimes use an Olympus Super Zoom 300 35mm with 35 to 135 lens. Have not jumped into digital yet....Probably will cover that base one of these days. Of course use a tripod when required.

[evaddek]

thank you for the quick replys.
Its nice to see a few people still use film!
I have tried digital cameras but find my results are just not the same.
the old dog new tricks thing.
thanks again
dave

[Big_Boy_4005]

QUOTE: Originally posted by talbanese

Holy Cow!!! Nice equipment!! I just use a Kodak DX3900 Digital camera. It's 3.1 Mp. I use Adobe Photoshop Elements to edit the photo as well as create fast web galleries.

I can't afford the super cameras.

I have the DX4330 model, also a 3.1 Mp but with a 10x zoom. I use an ancient copy of Corel Photohouse to crop and resize images for posting.

I haven't used my old Minolta since, though I have a lot of different lenses for it. I know that I can order CD's when I get the film developed, but digital is much quicker, cheaper and easier than film.

Here's one that I took recently with the digital. By the way, once cropped and compressed, this image is only 51.2K bytes on the web. Click on it to enlarge it![:)]

[JoeKoh]

I have a pentax 35 mm zoom. it works for now. want to get a digital when I can.
stay safe
Joe

[edblysard]

Funny, reading through all these post, I realized we have mentioned equipment that, if we totaled it all up, would be over 10 grand...
I used to sell cameras for a dept store.
One day, back in the late 70s, a young man came in to pick up his photos.
I was looking through them with him, some fantastic shots of a motorcross race, the shots looked as if he was standing at the bottom of one of the jumps, with the racers airborn just coming off the top off the hill, doing cross ups and one handed jumps.
I asked him what camera he used, expecting him to have some really nice stuff, and one heck of a telephoto lens.
He told me I wouldnt believe him, but he used a Kodak 110.
No way, he would have to be standing in the track to get those shots, and a 110 dosnt take any other lenses.
He went to his car, and returned with a broom handle, that had a old shelf bracket on one end, and a junk accelerater cable off a motorcycle taped to it length wise, running down the handle.
The 110 screwed on the bracket, and the cable tripped the shutter button.
The thing was held together with duct tape and wood screws.
He would stand on the sideline, and when the racers were coming up the hill, he would stick the broom handle out in the track, and hit the shutter just as they crested the hill, guessing at where to point.
It worked, really well in fact, he ended up selling quite a few of his photos to a local motorcross shop for their calander.

Moral of the story?
You can own $4500.00 worth of Nikon 35mm, and still take just snapshots, or $29.00 worth of Kodak 110 and a free broom handle and take sellable photos.
I guess it would be that it really dosnt matter what the equipment cost, or how many do-dads, bells and whistles are on the camera, it all boils down to the person behind the viewfinder, and how they approach taking the photos they want.

Ed

[Modelcar]

....How true Ed....and Big Boy, that's a real nice shot. I would think it took some doing to keep the snow from upsetting the lens opening. and making the pic dark. [8D]

[RudyRockvilleMD]

I still have 2 Pentax K 1000, 35 mm, SLR bodies and an f/2, 50 mm lens. I recently bought 2 Pentax ZX-50 bodies, a Pentax 35 - 80mm f/3.5 - f/5.6 zoom lens, which is auto focus, and I kept my 70 - 210 mm Tokina Zoom lens from the K - 1000's. I also bought a Pentax 50 mm f/2 autofocus lens for one of the ZX 50 cameras, and I use it as a "rainy day" lens when I need more light. I also have a Sony Hi 8 camcorder which I use to videotape trains at the same time I photograph them with my 35 mm cameras.

[Modelcar]

...Big Boy: how about some tips on how to install a photo on the forum here as you did above....and again, that really is a nice one...

[Wdlgln005]

Have you seen any of the Mars photos? The rovers carry a 1MP camera! What is needed is a quality lens with a sharp focus. For railfans, a high shutter is needed for moving equipment, or fast adjustments for slower or static subjects. For model work, you need a macro capable of copying a business card. Depth of field becomes important.

[Anonymous]

I use a Hewlett-Packard Photosmart 945. This is a 5.3 Megapixel camera, built in 300mm zoom, and while it isn't a SLR, with an adapter, it will accept additional glasses on top of its own, plus telophoto lenses. It also has an adjustable shutter speed (16 - 1/2000 sec.), aperature (F2.8 - F11.3), and film speed (100, 200, 400). Shoots in full color, black and white, and sepia.

Here are some of my recent photos.
To see more of my photos click on the link:
http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=2955

Click on either photo to see a larger version.

[Modelcar]

....Great pic's John. I like the way one can see the grade change on the other side of the bridge.

[rrnut282]

I still use my Olympus OM-4T with its spot meter and through-the-lens flash metering system to get just the exposure I want, not what some chip programmer thinks I should use. I use it with a 50mm F1.2, a 28-85mm and 80-200mm zooms. Until I find an affordable digital with most of these features, I'll still use film.

[Nora]

We recently got a Minolta Dimage A1 digital camera (& Ed, thanks for the info about your camera a couple months back, it helped us in making our choice). I really like it, I've been playing around with it a lot trying to learn everything it does. Although at the rate I'm going I'll need a new hard drive or an awful lot of CDs before too long.

--Nora

[jchnhtfd]

Got to admit if I had to have just one camera now, I'd use my Canon A70 -- and do; it's small enough to go in a coat pocket (where it rides most of the time!). The rest of the gear is nice to have -- but as Ed said up there, you can have the best gear in the world, and if you don't have the 'eye', it's just expensive paper weights -- and some really fabulous pictures have been taken with very very simple cameras. By way of excuse, we have the fancy stuff because my son is a theatrical photographer (pro), among other things -- and he 'loans' me his obsolete gear!

[domefoamer]

The best camera is the one most enjoyable to use, because you will use it more often. So rrnut282 and I would bring out our old Olympi and savor the precise light meters and wonderfully bright viewfinders of our OMs. But wait, the best camera is the one you actually use the most! Given the price of shooting film in serious quantity, as successful pros have always done, that means digital is best. Especially for techniques like panning, where instant feedback via review helps you find the right balance of motion and shutter speed. But there's one huge problem remaining with digital-- the lack of wide-angle lenses.
Most of my train photos aren't run-bys. I shoot while riding on the train. A few years ago, when I had an opportunity for a cab ride aboard an F7 through the Royal Gorge, I decided it was time to buy my first new camera in years. It remains my one indespensable shootin' iron on any train ride: the Voigtlander Bessa, with 15mm Color Heliar.
For $400 new, you get a bare-bones plastic box with shutter and light meter. Not even a rangefinder! But it gets better. This camera's worth is justfied mostly by the Leica thread carved inside its lens mount. The 15mm Heliar (Japanese) is far cheaper than the Leica equivalent, and Popular Photographer called the Heliar the best ultrawide lens they'd ever tested (Circa 1994). Attach a matched viewfinder to the body to frame your shots, or not. I find the width of my eyeglasses works pretty well to define the width of the shot. At such a short focal length, focus is rarely an issue. Good thing, since you must approximate and set the distances. The lens has none of the light falloff at the edges that plague other ultrawides. It's so sharp that you can easliy crop out enlargements to match 20mm or 24mm lengths. Biggest handicap is, it's hard to use filters, but it can be done. I suppose it may be the last film camera I still use, someday...

[jchnhtfd]

Domefoamer -- quite right about the lack of ultra-wide and wide angle lenses for high end digital; in fact, the problem is worse than it seems at first, since almost all high end digital cameras use a chip smaller than a 'standard' 35mm size, and so the effective focal length of any lens attached needs to be multiplied by 1.6 or thereabouts (that is, a 100 mm lens shoots like a 160). Help is on the way, at the very top end of top end digital, with chips coming from Canon and Nikon which are about the same size and aspect ratio as the 'standard' 35mm size. But you don't even WANT to know what they cost...

[Modelcar]

....Can't one use his normal 35mm lenses from film Cannon cameras over on the new Cannon Digital Rebel...? Including wide angle....

[jchnhtfd]

I think the digital Rebel has the small chip... let me go find out... yup. Small chip. All Canon lenses fit all Canon bodies, however. However, the apparent effective focal length in terms of image size is the same as a lens with a focal length 1.6 times that of the focal length shown (that is, the image coverage on the digital Rebel -- which is a magnificent camera, by the way) is less than what you would get with the same lens on a regular Rebel. A digital Rebel using a 30 mm 'wide angle' will produce the same image as a standard 35 mm camera using a 50 mm 'normal' lens.

Note that I put 'normal' in quotes -- what is 'normal' for a 35 mm is, for example, a whacking great telephoto for, say, a Minox -- but would be a superwide for, say, a Rollei or Hasselblad.

what's normal?

[evaddek]

I'm still a film user (love that smell) and use 100 speed all the time ,I'm wondering if this will work on moving trains or should use something faster? 100 works great on 1000ft. lake freighters! I have had a digital nikon for two years and have used it two or three times but just don,t like the results.

[mudchicken]

evaddek:

As long as you have sufficient light and can bum the f-stop up to 1/250 sec or better, you are OK...faster film only starts to loose detail as it gets "grainy".....

This old dinosaur keeps a digital (Minolta Dimage S414)with him at all times (work or play), but still shoots Kodachrome 64 slide film when out 'fanning so that I can keep it & recover it years from now using a Minolta X-700/XGM with 35-70 & 35-200 lenses and a motor-drive film eater. Digitals are nice, but they all go thru batteries faster than Sherman marched to the sea....

Personal opinion: print film won't last as long and is a waste of $$$ in this day and age. If you want prints, lots of them and fast -go digital. If you want quality and long life, think Kodachrome slides....Ed. Jamie, Joe & Dome all have very valid points.

[Modelcar]

Thanks for the info Jamie....and as for prints, for my own personal use...print film prints are going to last as long as I will...maybe longer.

[Anonymous]

A Minolta 370 w/ 50mm
A Canon Rebel 2000 w/ 28-80mm zoom
lens for the Minolta: 28-70mm zoom, 135mm, 75-205mm zoom.
And Kodachrome 64 all the time, yet i have also tried Kodaks Elite-Crome 200, not bad but not as good as the K64
-justin franz

[Big_Boy_4005]

Gee Mudchicken, I run out of memory before I run out of batteries.

I only have one card, and no laptop to download to. I don't usually dump bad shots because the small screen is kind of hard to see in certain lighting conditions, and I might have caught something good.

For the cost of porcessing 3 rolls of 36, I can get another card. My trips are always short, usually a couple of hours max, and 50 miles or less.

I'm really starting to fall in love with my digital. Its light, small, quick, easy and cheap, and I can crop the output the way I want when I get home. I can save it forever on CD or even share it with everyone in less time than it takes to process a roll of film.[:D]

P.S. This is my 800th post! [:)]