mine is:Olympus ''FE-280''


and the same colour

Aww how cute is that,luvs ur cam

awww claaaire (she has started an almost normal topic here you could even play along, no? ok i will though)




Theres mine, Sony R1.
Pretty nifty looking, but stupidly out of date now.



Getting this soon:


Nikon D300 i might actually die when this comes through the letter box.

how much did that cost you claire?

You're no fun you lot.


Ok, i have this:



Yay me.

cool, mine is too stupid but its work :\

Canon 400D

claire you'll probably be mad at me for pointing this out but... that compact has specs that pretty much dick all over your D1H except that you can obviously change the lenses on your D1H.

How much did that set you back, and when?

Haha, so naive.

£300 for the body, lense, bag, memory card, card reader, flash, mini-tripod, human instruction manual, etc etc.

Just before xmas.

claire dont call me naive thanks i was just pointing out your camera is pretty much less current than your average sony Ericson phone camera, its just got better glass.


Personally i would have got a D40x on that budget too.

Well, c'mon. You gotta see what i mean?

Yeah, it's around 2mp, but when will I be printing my pictures A0 size? Because that's the only time the number of pixels that you're shooting with is going to matter.

2mp is not going to record a whole lot of detail too.


you cant say your never going to want to print your images bigger than 8x10, and if you ever send a 2mp photo to an image editor these days they'll just laugh you out of the office.


plus the noise control at high iso when that camera was released was basically non existent by todays standards.


on that budget i still say d40x all the way

Dreading the response to my camera now:



Cost me round the £500 mark.

I used that camera once - I thought it was pretty good actually!

as for the "megapixles makes your cock bigger" response to the D1H:

Megapixels are a way of recording information, if you cant shoot a photo, why would recording more mad information make a difference? My old phone was 3megapixels and was shite, where as the D1h for years was the standard for shooting digital sequences - its fast, rugged and great camera - I bought an F5 then a D1h and now D2H and reading skate forums I was a little put off - things like skate perception saying the battery only lasted 20mins and the prints couldnt be larger that 6x4 - but after talking to a real skate photographer, he showed me some photos that were shot n the D1h (all the geoof rowley adverts pre 2004 for vans) and thought "good enough for transworld - good enough for me" the perception that megapixels make things better is comedy, I rarely print over A4 and have gone as far as A3 happily with the low megapixel D1h and got great results - im more concerned about metering the colour than worrying about pixel count - also, the main difference between a snappy cam and a true DSLR is that the snappy cam wont give you the true manual controls and RAW file transfer - so if your recording jpegs at 12megapixel, the Joint Professional Photographers have decided what colour things are for you and things like that - the digital darkroom is reduced to basics in comparrison when shooting in that format.

so yeah the little plastic D40x is a pretty little camera, but you have no idea how fast a pro-slr is when it comes to tracking autofocus on a sequence when you need to focus 20 times in a 4 second sequence burst - cams like the D40x just arent in that bracket - other things like spending all day going through menus to change the smallest thing is also a nightmare, well it is for me a as a learner, i prefer all the controls to hand with buttons so i can change bracketing and iso features etc.

Judge the camera off results, not pixel rating is what im trying to say.

Oh, forgot to say it was Pip's camera and he was the 'Human Instruction Manual'.

I do know how fast a pro dsl is when you need to track a subject and get shots off at speed ive been in that situation and understand the benefits.

and yes back in 2001 it was one of the fastest cameras on the market and yes it was an industry standard tool, back in 2001.

i doubt on speed and functionality 7 years on there wont be much to pick between it and the entry level dslrs on the market at the moment like the d40x, plus the noise control, metering and even the af system i can pretty much guarantee will be a whole lot better.

actually, the D1 is still faster due to the metering system - the 3D colour matrix is still banging.

and thankfully, since 2001 skaters havent actually started to skate any faster, or else id never capture an image!!!!

if your actually interested - have a read of this link:

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2001_reviews/nikond1h.html

If your getting a D300 it might help with understanding the benefits of some of the higher end features - I use the D2 and i think ive covered about 20% of what the camera is capable of - i leanred a lot from reading about what was upgraded so I could see what pro-photographers werent happy with, to handle the camera will be the same is the d1/D2 so the functionality will be shockingly similar and the main difference is the megapixel rating. the D3 looks hot to death tho

I do, thank you for assuming i know nothing about cameras and have the mental age of a 6 year old.


Funnily enough the reason i want to upgrade to the d300 is because of the access to higher end features it would proivde, otherwise why would i upgrade?


And i read that steve's digi cam review earlier.

I didnt assume that you knew nothing, just offering some advice a pro gave me thats all - but if you know everything, help me!

why didnt you get the D3? as for the D1h being slow etc - I think the shutter speed on the D1h is far faster than the D300 no? maybe i read that wrong, not like i ever shot at 1/16,000 anyways - but still, both are decent cameras obviously. Im so far away from understanding the high end feauturs, I guess when i max out my D2 ill switch to its big brother - but I cant see that happening coz Ill just switch to film if I need to up the quality and shoot with the F5 i guess.

i need to shoot more, and read this manual!

Twiglet, if you have a mo, id love you to look at some of my photos and give me some technical advice, coz i havent a fucking clue what im doing in the 3D matrixing! can i mail you some?

i dont assume i know everything but i dont assume i know nothing either.


and dont play dumb and patronize me over a point im putting accross.


in the end im getting the d300 because my camera is stupidly out of date and dosnt do what i require mainly because its a bridge camera and not a true dslr, and yes when i got it 2 years back i was as naive as a 6 year old when it came to cameras.

im not getting a d3 mainly because i cant afford it, im getting the d300 on finance, but if i win the lottery tomorrow id buy a pair of d3s probably 10 grands worth of glass and the new 22 grand hasselblad hd3-II because id like access to that kind of equipment.


and i still stand by my point about the d1h, yes its a camera perfectly capable of producing results but its still out of date, if it was still a current product why would there be 7 years of upgrades floating around the market?

Ahh my baby, me and this sexy cam have seen so many awesome pictures 39 mega pixels makes me an amazing photographer. I usually shoot from the bottom of stairs with a riduculous death lens and use the rule of thirds every time to get the "Professional" feel, I'm an artist and no-one understands my "style" so I'll just sit in here and flame all you guys.....

well its pretty obvious no one is seeing my point so im just not going to bother.

i seem to spend 90% of my time on this forum arguing now.

I hate to get all childish on you, but you started it?

Why not just leave things be if you don't like arguing?

not trying to patronize you dude, just wanted some help - coz as I have discovered, photographers are elitist arseholes in general and dont part with knowledge - if you can help, great - but if not, no worries.


and of course things change in 7 years, camera companies cant sit on a product and hope people still buy it - like you said, the D1h is perfectly capable and for £300 inc all the gear, claires looking good (or at least her pics are!)

but if you do want patronizing......ill look foward to your D300 results in Transworld ;o) (kidding)

but still, id like you to offer some help on shots, you will be having a whole lot of reading to do when you D300 comes, and the operating system is practically identical to mine and claires cams, so be cool to get a "dude press this and that to get this reult" rather than the 25 pages on matrixing in the green lantern guide!!

sorry if your offended chief, ill give you a lolly at the sk8uk meet or something

hhahaa mikey is such a dickwad (i have no clue what a dickwad is by the way)

dude, you have a perfectly valid point, and we were debating it, argueing is when you say "my photos are better than your photos" or something like that!

the bottom line is simple, people have different cameras for different needs and the only thing that matters is the end result of a landed trick.


yeah?



debating claire, merely debating the pro's and cons of cameras!

I have nothing to say to you.




Ahem.

Yeah sorry i was being a "Dickwad", i was just making the point that you guys were getting into that whole holier than though through wisdom of infinite knowledge of cameras. This is actually no joke the only camera i have

He's really not joking.

I've seen it.

(yeah, i noticed it... )

It was pretty top of the range (apart from top notch pro stuff) when I got it.. Believe it or not..
Some time in 2000.


I do think I'm overdue for an upgrade.

seriouisly, some of the best photos i ever shot were point and shoot cardboard jobbies

im getting a Nikon F5 back next week!! WOOOOT

For digital,



For film,

PERFECT dude, if you get a shot happy with your DSLR and then use the identical settings on your film - do you get the same results?

ive been desperate to ask someone that

Digital


35mm Film


Advantix Film


Got lots of different lenses but cba to say

Yes, pretty much, Can be really time consuming though, would recommend a retro light meter, got mine and exposure is always right.

Nikon FM2 with a MD-12 motor drive.

Dont have a dslr yet although have access to a D300.

Twiglet: With regards to you saying that you'd rather get a D40x than a D1H, I think the D40x is a pointless option as, for the same price you can get a D40 with an extra 55-200 Vibration Reduction lens. More zoooom. And the D40's 6MP will allow you to print A3 anyway, even pro photographers admit that the D40x is a bit of a waste.

Also, from Ken Rockwell's page:



Pip: Don't diss the D40! You may think it's a little boys camera, but I honestly think that our new entry level DSLRs can compete with your old school pro D1 and D2's. On paper, the features aren't quite as good (especially with regards to shutter speed) and it does take more cycling through menus to change the options, but in practice, the D40 takes amazing pictures, dare I say better than the D1?












All of those were taken right after the Who? premier at Bay, with my D40 and the little built in flash. No flashguns, fisheyes, just 18-55 kit lens and a UV fliter to stop it scratching! Dynamic auto focus for moving subjects does the job perfectly, and even the build in flash is an absolute babe. (The last pic was a long exp and that one did indeed use Claire's flashgun, but that's it).

Are those really worse than the results from D1 and D2?

For me:

it's not the camera, it's the person usuing it.

Whilst waiting for you to change the options for the F-Stop and Exposure, the dude did a least two more tries at that block.


... then you forgot to turn the flash on and had to go thru a whole load of other menus for that.


It's a good cam, i'll give you that, but i'd rather have access to all the buttons straight away. I hardly use the menu on my cam other than to delete photos or reduce the quality from .NEF to .jpeg.

My lense was a standard 18-55mm, i don't have a fisheye, I have one flashgun which obviously came to your rescue for different kinds of shots.

We all have different needs for different cameras, i guess.

I've got an Olympus E500, but now I've seen Claires I'm sooooooooooooo trading it in!

A bit exaggerated!

I've got it all sorted now, F stop is on button and exposure is in the menus, true, but I have my menu on there by default so as soon as I enter the menu exposure is there. And popping the flash up is just one button on the side, no menus for it. And your flashgun was only used for the long exposure one, rest was built-in. Having said that, the built-in flash probably won't get me very far in skate photography, so I'll probably be getting one anyway. I'll also be able to do indoor bouce flash then.

There's no doubt yours is faster when it comes to changing settings purely because it has all the buttons, but I still believe the new school entry level DSLRs can compete with the old school pro ones. Not faster at action sports photography, but at least as good results. You got yours for skate photos though, fair enough. I got mine mainly for landscape/nature photography (as you can tell from the photo thread) and of course family snaps, didn't think I'd be doing skate photos.