Best Digital Camera in 2013?

Q. I'm looking for a digital camera with the following:

* Awesome, detailed shots for both amateur and professional photography use
* Fast, extreme action modes with instant, non-blurry shots (no delay unless optional)
* Full 1080p Quality Video with Excellent Sound and no buzzing/noises
* Great Image Stabilization
* Lovely Zoom with little to no shaking and annoying sounds
* Ability to record beautifully in both low light and very bright settings
* Easiness to learn, maintain, and adjust to
* Durable and lasts for maybe 20 years

A lifetime warranty for a camera product would be nice, but I doubt it exists. I've looked at the newest Canon Rebel (zoom/sound issues), Nikon D7100 (seems too stiff in certain settings), some Panasonic models, etc. I am on a budget and want to record high quality music videos and shorts, and take fancy pictures with the camera I am seeking. I want to spend no more than maybe $650 on my ideal product. What are your suggestions and knowledge of expertise?

A. I have a dream that someday anyone who decides to take up photography as a hobby will first know and understand this: "It isn't the camera its the photographer."

A person with zero knowledge of light, composition and exposure will be unable to use any camera in any mode other than Program or Auto, allowing the camera to determine ISO, aperture and shutter speed. Even then, zero knowledge of just composition will usually produce mere snapshots.

In 42 years I have never owned a camera that made really good pictures.

In 42 years I have never owned a camera that made really bad pictures.

However, in those 42 years I have used a camera to make some really good pictures and some really bad pictures. The camera is just a tool and gets neither credit nor blame for my results good or bad. That's all on me.

Buy the least expensive DSLR you can find. Read & study the Owner's Manual. Then enroll in photography classes. Take notes. Practice. Make changes to aperture or shutter speed or ISO only when you understand why you're making them and what the results will be.

A 20 year old digital camera will be as useless as a 20 year old computer is today.

In many states a "lifetime" warranty is considered 7 years. Some high-end lenses (translate as a lens costing a few thousand dollars) have a 5 year warranty. Most DSLR bodies have a 1 year warranty.

Original Question

What is the best time of the year in 2013 to buy a digital camera?

Q. I figured before Christmas of 2012 would be a bad time to buy one, but what would be the best time of 2013 to buy one, taking product cycles into consideration? I don't know too much about that, really. Thanks for any input!

A. The best time to buy a camera is now.

If you wait until tomorrow when the prices may have dropped you have wasted another day not having a camera. Because tomorrow arrives and tomorrow they may be cheaper... another day of your life gone.

Original Question

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

Digital Camera for wildlife photography help?

Q. I am planing a couple trips in the next year. First trip is to go up to Alaska or Canada and I want to try and get some nice Polar Bear and Musk Oxen shots. Then I am going to be going out to Yellowstone to try and photograph wolves and finally I will be taking a trip to Australia and New Zealand and am hoping to get some great landscape and animal shots. But now I have to figure out what is going to be the best camera for me to get. I have a budget of around $3500.

Right now I am looking at the Nikon D 7100, Nikon D 7000, Cannon EOS 7 D, and Sony Alpha SLT-A77.

I am also then figureing on getting either a 300mm or 400mm lens then buying a 2X teleconverter. I'm trying to do all this for $3500 or less I know its going to be tough. Obviously I can not afford the real nice lenses in the 300mm zoom so how much is this going to affect my quality if I get a little bit cheaper lens? My goal is I want to have nice enough pictures to where I could blow them up and hang them up around my house with out the image getting grainy or fuzzy. I'm looking at blowing them up to 24 x 36 and maybe bigger for landscape shots.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! Thank you so much for your time.

A. You might get to see these animals, but don't get your hopes up too high. The Nikon D7100 with 18-105mm could be a good choice of camera for most of your shots. A super duper great telephoto to get the kind of shots you are dreaming of will blow your budget. For less ambitious but pretty good shots you could get the Nikon 70-300mm AF-S VR (the good 70-300, not the cheapo). Forget about a 2X teleconverter. The 70-300mm lacks a tripod collar, and it will be front heavy. You will want to bring a tripod. You need to think about what day pack you will carry it in, as the tripod must fit. There are some decent travel tripods. However, the light duty ballhead on some of these may be barely adequate with the 70-300mm. You need to assemble something with a good medium duty 3 way pan head, like maybe the Manfrotto 804RC2 or the Induro PHT2. BTW, if you want to point a panhead higher than about 30 degrees, the trick is to put the quick release plate on backwards.
Which brings us to, when do you expect to do this?
Winter, aurora watching?
You will need serious clothes.
http://www.martingrumet.com/yellowknife01-30-2013-02-2000.jpg
Carry your camera in a padded case with several handwarmer packs. Have an extra charged battery in your pocket. Two layers of glove liners with handwarmer packs inside can probably give you adequate dexterity without freezing your fingers.
Also have a clean, dry cotton handkerchief in the bag to wipe off condensation.
Getting focused in the dark could be a problem. You might be able to lock on autofocus on a distant street light, and switch to manual. Or you could spend more money on an older style AF-D prime lens like a 20mm or 24mm, and be able to dial to infinity in the dark.
For aurora shots set white balance to daylight. Practice with your equipment at home before you go on your trip. Maybe ISO is 800. More gets noisy. Exposure time maybe 20 seconds. More shows star trails. Also the aurora is dynamic, and more exposure makes it look blob like.
http://www.martingrumet.com/yellowknife02-05-2013-01-2000.jpg
http://www.martingrumet.com/yellowknife02-05-2013-02-2000.jpg
About midnight to 2am is often best activity, although not always.

Original Question

camera choice confusion?

Q. Hi. Il just give a brief overview of my issue...

Im aiming to travel next year from London to Auckland (no planes - the long way across europe, asia) and document my trip through photography, im having some confusion between which camera i should buy. Iv narrowed it down to either the Canon D5 mk2 or the Canon D7. I will only be taking the one body but i want to be able to capture all manor of shots but my main interest are landscape and wildlife/action. Iv read quite a few comparisons and am feeling a little overwhelmed. It seems that the two cameras are both suited individually for my needs. What would you recommend? Any advice on which lense i should invest in would also be appreciated. Thanks for your time
How come? I know the MK2 is FF which is better for the landscape but the D7 shoots nearly twice the fps. Could i substitue the FF and use a wide angle lense? Im an amateur hence the lack of knowledge. Thanks
Thought i should also add im about to start a photography course in order to understand the theory. Il have mucho fun putting it all to practise before i start on my journey.

A. Either camera will, in the right hands, produce good results. However, these are rather bulky cameras so you really should visit a camera store and handle both models. Think about carrying either of them for several hours a day.

So I'm going to suggest a different make and model of camera for you to consider - the Sony NEX-5R which has an APS-C sized sensor and is Wi-Fi capable. Here is a review/preview:
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/sony-alpha-nex-5r

At B&H - http://www.bhphotovideo.com - you can find the Sony NEX-5R with an 18-55mm zoom lens for $748.00 or you could buy the body for $598.00 and add the all-rounder 18-200mm zoom for an additional $848.00. A version with a 16-50mm zoom lens will be available on or about Jan. 23, 2013 and is shown for $798.00.

Regardless of what make and model of camera you decide to buy, you're going to have to devote time to read & study the Owner's Manual. You'll also need to learn about the main components of photography - Light, Composition, Exposure and Depth of Field. Contrary to popular belief, simply buying an expensive camera doesn't automatically mean you'll immediately begin making good pictures. Spend time at these sites:

LIGHT
http://photographyknowhow.com/photography-lighting/
http://photographyknowhow.com/quality-of-light-in-photography/
http://photographyknowhow.com/direction-of-light-in-photography/

COMPOSITION
http://www.photographymad.com/pages/view/10-top-photography-composition-rules

EXPOSURE
http://www.digital-photography-school.com/learning-exposure-in-digital-photography

DEPTH of FIELD
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm

Another, more esoteric component of photography is called Seeing Photographically. This site will help you understand what this is:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/aesthetics-1.shtml

Original Question

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

Best Digital Camera Under 200 Dollars 2013 ?

Q. Best Digital Camera Under 200 Dollars ? what is the best camera i can buy for 200 dollars or less

A. Definitely, the Canon PowerShot SX500 IS http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00908BMVE/ref=as_li_qf_sp_asin_il_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=B00908BMVE&linkCode=as2&tag=laptop058-20

It takes really great photos and videos at 1080 pixels. It has a good image stabilization and auto focus as well as a nice 30x zoom which is great. This camera has received tonnes of positive feedbacks and iI think is the best you can get for less than $200

Original Question

Digital Camera for wildlife photography help?

Q. I am planing a couple trips in the next year. First trip is to go up to Alaska or Canada and I want to try and get some nice Polar Bear and Musk Oxen shots. Then I am going to be going out to Yellowstone to try and photograph wolves and finally I will be taking a trip to Australia and New Zealand and am hoping to get some great landscape and animal shots. But now I have to figure out what is going to be the best camera for me to get. I have a budget of around $3500.

Right now I am looking at the Nikon D 7100, Nikon D 7000, Cannon EOS 7 D, and Sony Alpha SLT-A77.

I am also then figureing on getting either a 300mm or 400mm lens then buying a 2X teleconverter. I'm trying to do all this for $3500 or less I know its going to be tough. Obviously I can not afford the real nice lenses in the 300mm zoom so how much is this going to affect my quality if I get a little bit cheaper lens? My goal is I want to have nice enough pictures to where I could blow them up and hang them up around my house with out the image getting grainy or fuzzy. I'm looking at blowing them up to 24 x 36 and maybe bigger for landscape shots.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! Thank you so much for your time.

A. You might get to see these animals, but don't get your hopes up too high. The Nikon D7100 with 18-105mm could be a good choice of camera for most of your shots. A super duper great telephoto to get the kind of shots you are dreaming of will blow your budget. For less ambitious but pretty good shots you could get the Nikon 70-300mm AF-S VR (the good 70-300, not the cheapo). Forget about a 2X teleconverter. The 70-300mm lacks a tripod collar, and it will be front heavy. You will want to bring a tripod. You need to think about what day pack you will carry it in, as the tripod must fit. There are some decent travel tripods. However, the light duty ballhead on some of these may be barely adequate with the 70-300mm. You need to assemble something with a good medium duty 3 way pan head, like maybe the Manfrotto 804RC2 or the Induro PHT2. BTW, if you want to point a panhead higher than about 30 degrees, the trick is to put the quick release plate on backwards.
Which brings us to, when do you expect to do this?
Winter, aurora watching?
You will need serious clothes.
http://www.martingrumet.com/yellowknife01-30-2013-02-2000.jpg
Carry your camera in a padded case with several handwarmer packs. Have an extra charged battery in your pocket. Two layers of glove liners with handwarmer packs inside can probably give you adequate dexterity without freezing your fingers.
Also have a clean, dry cotton handkerchief in the bag to wipe off condensation.
Getting focused in the dark could be a problem. You might be able to lock on autofocus on a distant street light, and switch to manual. Or you could spend more money on an older style AF-D prime lens like a 20mm or 24mm, and be able to dial to infinity in the dark.
For aurora shots set white balance to daylight. Practice with your equipment at home before you go on your trip. Maybe ISO is 800. More gets noisy. Exposure time maybe 20 seconds. More shows star trails. Also the aurora is dynamic, and more exposure makes it look blob like.
http://www.martingrumet.com/yellowknife02-05-2013-01-2000.jpg
http://www.martingrumet.com/yellowknife02-05-2013-02-2000.jpg
About midnight to 2am is often best activity, although not always.

Original Question

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

What is the future of the digital camera?

Q. Hi
What is the future of the digital camera?
I buy my first digital camera in the year 2003. It was a 3 mega pixel Kodak. And now in 2007 no stores sell 3 mega pixels. The shipper mega pixel you can get is 5 and more. So what is the future of digital camera? All the companies are making competition and maybe in 2013 the smallest mega pixels in store will be 20 mega pixels. So what do you think?

A. more features will be added in
this is what i think

wifi connectivity (already in nikon) that can let u blog it automatically
should be able to share it immediately to other users on phone/pda/camera.

image stabilisation should be improved so shaky hands is no problem.

user interface also shud be improved to make it fool proof.

Original Question

Which 2013 new semi-compact digital cameras are compatable with my old but reliable MAC OSX 10.4.11?

Q.

A. While the software included with the camera may not have a Mac version, you generally never need it anyway. Most advanced photographers do not use the included camera software, but simply transfer photos from camera to computer by removing the memory card from the camera and inserting it into a computer (PC or Mac).

In the end, this is easier, and it alleviates the need to install any software on your computer from the camera maker - which can be temperamental.

To do this, you may need to buy an inexpensive memory card reader - but most modern PCs and Macs already have SD card readers built into them.

Macs will read the various versions of the formatting used in the typical camera (FAT). The only restriction is you should never delete a photo in a Mac nor should you format the memory card in a Mac.

Formatting is a no-no as natively, the Mac will not format in FAT, but use the Mac file system - which no camera can use. Formatting the card in the camera formats it in FAT, which the Mac can read. You can actually format the memory card in a Mac, but you have to use advanced commands to do it right. You need to format in both FAT and usually use a 32kb file allocation block, which can only be done with a unix command. It is far easier for most people to just format the card in the camera.

If you delete files off the memory card using a Mac, the files are not deleted but just hidden. Therefore even though you cannot see the files, you will not be able to recover the memory space on the card.

If you delete photos using a Mac - you must also empty the trash bin to recover the memory space on the memory card.

If you delete the photos in the camera, you don't have to be concerned with this.

If you use a camera that produces RAW files, you may need to find a codec that will properly handle them, or use a 3rd party software such as Adobe Lightroom. But JPGs should work fine. This is an issue with PCs as well.

Otherwise you should have no issues.

Original Question

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

Best Digital Camera Under 200 Dollars 2013 ?

Q. Best Digital Camera Under 200 Dollars ? what is the best camera i can buy for 200 dollars or less

A. Definitely, the Canon PowerShot SX500 IS http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00908BMVE/ref=as_li_qf_sp_asin_il_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=B00908BMVE&linkCode=as2&tag=laptop058-20

It takes really great photos and videos at 1080 pixels. It has a good image stabilization and auto focus as well as a nice 30x zoom which is great. This camera has received tonnes of positive feedbacks and iI think is the best you can get for less than $200

Original Question

Digital Camera for wildlife photography help?

Q. I am planing a couple trips in the next year. First trip is to go up to Alaska or Canada and I want to try and get some nice Polar Bear and Musk Oxen shots. Then I am going to be going out to Yellowstone to try and photograph wolves and finally I will be taking a trip to Australia and New Zealand and am hoping to get some great landscape and animal shots. But now I have to figure out what is going to be the best camera for me to get. I have a budget of around $3500.

Right now I am looking at the Nikon D 7100, Nikon D 7000, Cannon EOS 7 D, and Sony Alpha SLT-A77.

I am also then figureing on getting either a 300mm or 400mm lens then buying a 2X teleconverter. I'm trying to do all this for $3500 or less I know its going to be tough. Obviously I can not afford the real nice lenses in the 300mm zoom so how much is this going to affect my quality if I get a little bit cheaper lens? My goal is I want to have nice enough pictures to where I could blow them up and hang them up around my house with out the image getting grainy or fuzzy. I'm looking at blowing them up to 24 x 36 and maybe bigger for landscape shots.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated! Thank you so much for your time.

A. You might get to see these animals, but don't get your hopes up too high. The Nikon D7100 with 18-105mm could be a good choice of camera for most of your shots. A super duper great telephoto to get the kind of shots you are dreaming of will blow your budget. For less ambitious but pretty good shots you could get the Nikon 70-300mm AF-S VR (the good 70-300, not the cheapo). Forget about a 2X teleconverter. The 70-300mm lacks a tripod collar, and it will be front heavy. You will want to bring a tripod. You need to think about what day pack you will carry it in, as the tripod must fit. There are some decent travel tripods. However, the light duty ballhead on some of these may be barely adequate with the 70-300mm. You need to assemble something with a good medium duty 3 way pan head, like maybe the Manfrotto 804RC2 or the Induro PHT2. BTW, if you want to point a panhead higher than about 30 degrees, the trick is to put the quick release plate on backwards.
Which brings us to, when do you expect to do this?
Winter, aurora watching?
You will need serious clothes.
http://www.martingrumet.com/yellowknife01-30-2013-02-2000.jpg
Carry your camera in a padded case with several handwarmer packs. Have an extra charged battery in your pocket. Two layers of glove liners with handwarmer packs inside can probably give you adequate dexterity without freezing your fingers.
Also have a clean, dry cotton handkerchief in the bag to wipe off condensation.
Getting focused in the dark could be a problem. You might be able to lock on autofocus on a distant street light, and switch to manual. Or you could spend more money on an older style AF-D prime lens like a 20mm or 24mm, and be able to dial to infinity in the dark.
For aurora shots set white balance to daylight. Practice with your equipment at home before you go on your trip. Maybe ISO is 800. More gets noisy. Exposure time maybe 20 seconds. More shows star trails. Also the aurora is dynamic, and more exposure makes it look blob like.
http://www.martingrumet.com/yellowknife02-05-2013-01-2000.jpg
http://www.martingrumet.com/yellowknife02-05-2013-02-2000.jpg
About midnight to 2am is often best activity, although not always.

Original Question

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

What is the best time of the year in 2013 to buy a digital camera?

Q. I figured before Christmas of 2012 would be a bad time to buy one, but what would be the best time of 2013 to buy one, taking product cycles into consideration? I don't know too much about that, really. Thanks for any input!

A. The best time to buy a camera is now.

If you wait until tomorrow when the prices may have dropped you have wasted another day not having a camera. Because tomorrow arrives and tomorrow they may be cheaper... another day of your life gone.

Original Question

Is Nikon d40 still a good camera in 2013?

Q. Found a used Nikon d40 I might buy. Not sure about a camera with fewer megapixels than my phone(6.1). Anyone with experience with this camera let me know how well the pictures turn out? How large can I enlarge a photo before it starts to look pixelated? I currently use a film slr (k1000) and a digital bridge camera(16.1 mp fujifilm) and just want to be sure I'm not taking a step back.

A. Eric, in my opinion you should skip the ancient, outdated Nikon D40. Yes it was a good camera in its day buts its a 7 yr. old model and DSLR technology has passed it by.

I suggest considering the Pentax K-30 DSLR since it can use any lenses you have for your Pentax K1000. Pentax introduced the "K" lenses mount on your K1000 in 1975 and its still used today on their DSLR cameras.

Here is a review: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/pentax-k30/pentax-k30A.HTM

Original Question

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

Is Nikon d40 still a good camera in 2013?

Q. Found a used Nikon d40 I might buy. Not sure about a camera with fewer megapixels than my phone(6.1). Anyone with experience with this camera let me know how well the pictures turn out? How large can I enlarge a photo before it starts to look pixelated? I currently use a film slr (k1000) and a digital bridge camera(16.1 mp fujifilm) and just want to be sure I'm not taking a step back.

A. Eric, in my opinion you should skip the ancient, outdated Nikon D40. Yes it was a good camera in its day buts its a 7 yr. old model and DSLR technology has passed it by.

I suggest considering the Pentax K-30 DSLR since it can use any lenses you have for your Pentax K1000. Pentax introduced the "K" lenses mount on your K1000 in 1975 and its still used today on their DSLR cameras.

Here is a review: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/pentax-k30/pentax-k30A.HTM

Original Question

How long before this camera is considered obsolete?

Q. My son is a high school senior. Next year he wants to go to community college and live at home (at least that is reasonably affordable) instead of going away to school. He wants to take an expensive major however. Video production. We have been able to save about $5,000 towards his education. We are not wealthy people. The rest will have to come from loans and maybe a grant or scholarship.
We are looking at some "entry level" pro cameras in the $1500-1800 range. That's about 1/3 of our savings for his education.
Models include these:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/518555-REG/Sony_HVRHD1000U_HVR_HD1000U_Digital_High_Definition.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/745707-REG/Sony_HXR_MC2000U_HXR_MC2000U_Shoulder_Mount_AVCHD.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/878341-REG/Panasonic_hmc40kit_AG_HMC40_AVCCAM_HD_Camcorder.html
and
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/749467-REG/Canon_4922B002_XA10_HD_Professional_Camcorder.html

My concern is he starts September 2013 so these products may not even be available by then or others will be available. We hope he graduates May 2015. He tells us when he graduates he will maybe find a freelance job or shoot local cable news, build up some experience, maybe after 2 years go for a B.A. at least part time.
Is anything we buy him in 2013 (summer) going to be any use to him as a working professional in 2015 (summer)? So let's say you are a class of 2012 graduate with an AAS in video production. The camera you purchased in the summer of 2010 when you first started, do you still use it professionally? Can you make anything doing freelance news videos, PR videos or local account commercials with this equipment?
We're going to do everything we can to help him. No doubt he will still be living at home in the summer of 2015. By then he's going to have a student loan to pay off. We have a 2005 Hyundai Accent that we are going to give him for college. I hope that thing still runs when it is 10 years old and he isn't making car payments on top of that. The thing has 120,000 miles on it but runs really well. I just fear when he graduates he's going to be in deep debt and have limited employment. I may be wrong. What do you think? Thanks.

A. Hi "Upwardly Mobile":

Fellow Contributor "L" covered most of the bases quite well, but the only point he didn't underscore is that MOST good video & film production programs at community colleges HAVE the cameras, lights, mikes, tripods, and other gear that the students will learn on & use.

When I went to a local (but nationally prominent) university with a Broadcast/Film Dept., portable video was still fairly new, but all the film cameras, tripods, & light kits were supplied by the Department for students to "check out" as-needed for class projects.

And most video production students start out with Studio Production techniques (where it's easier for groups to learn 3-point lighting, camera setup & tripod/dolly operation, shot composition, audio techniques & mixing, etc.). No need for portable field gear there.

For field production & Electronic News Gathering, a good college will have a fair number of camcorders for students to use & check out (if needed for outside-of-class projects).

The same is true for Editing Software & computer workstations. Some college programs might be economizing and making students supply their own laptops for this, but all the major software companies offer Academic Editions of their normally-expensive edit suites at discounted prices. And of course, nowadays, apps like iMovie (Mac) and Movie Maker (PC) come "free" as part of the operating system and can accomplish what older (and expensive) software used to do, as far as basic editing.

As "L" mentioned, do a bit of "homework" yourself by contacting the community college's department head & instructors for your son's chosen major. Tour the facilities (studio and edit suites) and ask about the "equipment room" for student project gear. See what textbooks (a major expense) are required, and whether computer/laptop & software expense will be part of what's expected of your son. Only if there's little-or-no camcorder gear (or no hands-on studio cameras) would I recommend buying anything like the models from B+H that you listed.

Almost every cable TV & freelance video job I've had over the past 30 years has "supplied" (rented or company-owned) the cameras & grip gear I needed. I bring my own gear only when it's a "favor" or when what I have is better-suited to the task, or they want a "director with gear". My point being, your son doesn't need to own =any= camera gear to make a living freelancing. A good camera operator can stay busy in almost any part of the country, with just his/her skills. (Same for sound mixers & boom/wireless mike operators.)

hope this helps, and hope it saves you some money,
--Dennis C.
 

Original Question

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

Getting all of my film speed with Rodinal?

Q. I've been playing around with different films and developers and combinations for the past couple of months. I want to branch out from HC-110 and see what else is out there, and what else I like.

I've read a lot about Rodinal not delivering full film speed, and I pretty sure that's what I'm encountering here. It seems like whenever I soup in Rodinal at the standard times given on the Massive Dev Chart (a good place to start, at least), the negatives come out around 2-3 stops dark. I don't care so much for test rolls, but I shot a portrait session with medium format PanF+, developed in Rodinal, and lost at least 4 or 5 frames that could have been great. They were just too thin to recover.

Anyone have any advice here? I just want my exposures to come out the way they would if I was using HC-110. I'm not underexposing in camera, it's definitely something to do with the developer. I'm using 1:50 so far, and souping as documented on my little blog I use to keep track of my experiments:

http://filmsanddevelopers.blogspot.com/2013/05/adox-adonal-rodinal-and-ilford-panf.html
http://filmsanddevelopers.blogspot.com/2013/04/adox-adonal-rodinal-and-ilford-delta-100.html
I'm sorry, let me clarify: The negatives are thin. The images themselves (after being scanned or printed) are dark. Meaning, underexposed. I didn't state that very well.

Thanks for the info though, I'll run some more tests.

A. Like more density on the negatives you work with do you?

A photographer in Alaska used black and white film which he exposed to have a minimum of emulsion left on the film back after developing.

If it was my roll of film, I'd have had a heart attack and died on the spot! And if I had survived that I would have had my light meters. handheld and built into cameras, looked at plus the shutter speeds and lens apertures and then the film developers!

But back to all seriousness, this fella, lets call him Bill, also modified his print processing procedure, buying and using a digital enlarger timer and with closing the enlarger lens down, printed some of the most grain free images with great tonal scale! Both pics taken out of doors and pics taken indoors in low light conditions

Most lab rats would close their enlarger lenses down a stop or two and use seconds to expose proof sheets and prints.
This fella closed the lens down a few stops more and used tenths and hundredths of seconds as exposure times!

Plus had many more pic taking opportunities than the rest of us using Kodak Tri-X films or Illford's similar b&w product, pushing films to a paltry asa 800, 1200 or 1600 and exposing films for shadow detail.

This I beleive is where Rodinal and other developers used for developing b&w films rated to higher asa's got their so called bad reputations. The photographers could not or did not know how to modify their print processing procedure to take advantage of ther film developers ability to make such delicate looking negatives and the higher quality grain free images that resulted.

Original Question

Where can you get cheap polaroid cameras in australia?

Q. Does anyone know?

A. Why do you want 1950's technology?. Polaroids stink, I sold this cameras when they were first introduced and it went like this: Sell 3 cameras and two are returned. The third is/was up in the attic just waiting for gullible people to come along and think Polaroid instant print is the cat's meow. Well I guess 2013 is the year of gullible people. PLEASE don't waste your money! Two dollars a print equals 16 dollars expensive. BUT what if all 8 prints do not come out? The entire 8 prints never came out when I sold the cameras. I can't figure where all the Polaroid cameras are coming from. Polaroid must have stock piled them and then sold them this year. Stick to regular 4x6 prints priced at (here in the USA) from 13 cents to 20 cents a piece. Plus your can get reprints from the digtal file. Never mind that Polaroid prints fade in a few years while digital prints last a least one lifetime, more if stored in an album. Please don't buy.

Original Question

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

What kind of camera should I buy?

Q. I wouldn't like to spend over $800
I need a camera that's good quality..better than your average digital camera and that can both take photos and record video (that's not as important but it would be nice)
I would like to be able to use it for motion photos, landscape, night life etc.
Basically the most important thing is picture quality :)
Any ideas. Thanks!

A. Having used several DSLRs and mirrorless cameras, I like Pentax K-01 as a great camera- one of the best image quality out then in below $1000 cameras. Pentax used to sell for around $900 but their gamble with the style backfired so they are clearing them out. They currently sell for around $400 with a nice 40mm 2.8 lens.

Read full details here:
http://photography-with-any-camera.blogspot.com/2013/06/which-is-great-dslr-buy-these-days.html

Original Question

What is the best time of the year in 2013 to buy a digital camera?

Q. I figured before Christmas of 2012 would be a bad time to buy one, but what would be the best time of 2013 to buy one, taking product cycles into consideration? I don't know too much about that, really. Thanks for any input!

A. The best time to buy a camera is now.

If you wait until tomorrow when the prices may have dropped you have wasted another day not having a camera. Because tomorrow arrives and tomorrow they may be cheaper... another day of your life gone.

Original Question

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

What is the future of the digital camera?

Q. Hi
What is the future of the digital camera?
I buy my first digital camera in the year 2003. It was a 3 mega pixel Kodak. And now in 2007 no stores sell 3 mega pixels. The shipper mega pixel you can get is 5 and more. So what is the future of digital camera? All the companies are making competition and maybe in 2013 the smallest mega pixels in store will be 20 mega pixels. So what do you think?

A. more features will be added in
this is what i think

wifi connectivity (already in nikon) that can let u blog it automatically
should be able to share it immediately to other users on phone/pda/camera.

image stabilisation should be improved so shaky hands is no problem.

user interface also shud be improved to make it fool proof.

Original Question

What kind of camera should I buy?

Q. I wouldn't like to spend over $800
I need a camera that's good quality..better than your average digital camera and that can both take photos and record video (that's not as important but it would be nice)
I would like to be able to use it for motion photos, landscape, night life etc.
Basically the most important thing is picture quality :)
Any ideas. Thanks!

A. Having used several DSLRs and mirrorless cameras, I like Pentax K-01 as a great camera- one of the best image quality out then in below $1000 cameras. Pentax used to sell for around $900 but their gamble with the style backfired so they are clearing them out. They currently sell for around $400 with a nice 40mm 2.8 lens.

Read full details here:
http://photography-with-any-camera.blogspot.com/2013/06/which-is-great-dslr-buy-these-days.html

Original Question

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

Getting all of my film speed with Rodinal?

Q. I've been playing around with different films and developers and combinations for the past couple of months. I want to branch out from HC-110 and see what else is out there, and what else I like.

I've read a lot about Rodinal not delivering full film speed, and I pretty sure that's what I'm encountering here. It seems like whenever I soup in Rodinal at the standard times given on the Massive Dev Chart (a good place to start, at least), the negatives come out around 2-3 stops dark. I don't care so much for test rolls, but I shot a portrait session with medium format PanF+, developed in Rodinal, and lost at least 4 or 5 frames that could have been great. They were just too thin to recover.

Anyone have any advice here? I just want my exposures to come out the way they would if I was using HC-110. I'm not underexposing in camera, it's definitely something to do with the developer. I'm using 1:50 so far, and souping as documented on my little blog I use to keep track of my experiments:

http://filmsanddevelopers.blogspot.com/2013/05/adox-adonal-rodinal-and-ilford-panf.html
http://filmsanddevelopers.blogspot.com/2013/04/adox-adonal-rodinal-and-ilford-delta-100.html
I'm sorry, let me clarify: The negatives are thin. The images themselves (after being scanned or printed) are dark. Meaning, underexposed. I didn't state that very well.

Thanks for the info though, I'll run some more tests.

A. Like more density on the negatives you work with do you?

A photographer in Alaska used black and white film which he exposed to have a minimum of emulsion left on the film back after developing.

If it was my roll of film, I'd have had a heart attack and died on the spot! And if I had survived that I would have had my light meters. handheld and built into cameras, looked at plus the shutter speeds and lens apertures and then the film developers!

But back to all seriousness, this fella, lets call him Bill, also modified his print processing procedure, buying and using a digital enlarger timer and with closing the enlarger lens down, printed some of the most grain free images with great tonal scale! Both pics taken out of doors and pics taken indoors in low light conditions

Most lab rats would close their enlarger lenses down a stop or two and use seconds to expose proof sheets and prints.
This fella closed the lens down a few stops more and used tenths and hundredths of seconds as exposure times!

Plus had many more pic taking opportunities than the rest of us using Kodak Tri-X films or Illford's similar b&w product, pushing films to a paltry asa 800, 1200 or 1600 and exposing films for shadow detail.

This I beleive is where Rodinal and other developers used for developing b&w films rated to higher asa's got their so called bad reputations. The photographers could not or did not know how to modify their print processing procedure to take advantage of ther film developers ability to make such delicate looking negatives and the higher quality grain free images that resulted.

Original Question

Where can you get cheap polaroid cameras in australia?

Q. Does anyone know?

A. Why do you want 1950's technology?. Polaroids stink, I sold this cameras when they were first introduced and it went like this: Sell 3 cameras and two are returned. The third is/was up in the attic just waiting for gullible people to come along and think Polaroid instant print is the cat's meow. Well I guess 2013 is the year of gullible people. PLEASE don't waste your money! Two dollars a print equals 16 dollars expensive. BUT what if all 8 prints do not come out? The entire 8 prints never came out when I sold the cameras. I can't figure where all the Polaroid cameras are coming from. Polaroid must have stock piled them and then sold them this year. Stick to regular 4x6 prints priced at (here in the USA) from 13 cents to 20 cents a piece. Plus your can get reprints from the digtal file. Never mind that Polaroid prints fade in a few years while digital prints last a least one lifetime, more if stored in an album. Please don't buy.

Original Question

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

Any tips about going to vans warped tour Concert 2013!?

Q. Any helpful tips?In about 3 months I'm about to go to a vans warped tour this is my first time going I'm a girl and I'm 15 years
Would I get my ass kicked for wearing a band shirt? I'm going to see black veil brides....No rude answers! How do I avoid the mosh pit?

A. Ok so, I know this is really long, but I promise it's helpful :)

1. WATER- you need to stay hydrated and you need to know that it is going to be hot.
2. Dress for the weather (And no you won't get your *** kicked, you're encouraged to wear band t-shirts xD)
3. When you first get in there you need to either buy a schedule or go to the huge Vans blow up tent, it has the schedule on it and you should write down the bands you want to see and when they're playing
*Also, another note on that- It really helps to prioritize the bands you want to see and know that you might not get to see them all.
4. Get there early- If you do you'll have a chance to learn the area and possibly get some cool free stuff.
5. YOUR SURVIVAL BAG: I say this because it really does help to have this, anyways, you should have some type of bag (NOT PURSE) and in it you should have: Water, sunscreen, a sharpie, anything you might want signed, a fully charged cell phone, and a digital (Non-professional) camera.

MOSH PITS: To avoid mosh pits it is better to stay in the very front or hang in the back. To get to the very front you'll have to get to the set you're seeing early. If you find yourself in the pit by accident, just put your arms out in front of your and push (not shove!) your way out.

That's about all I have so I hope you have fun and good luck! :)

If you need any more tips you can go here ----> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2WwJXKK-6A

Original Question

Whats a good digital camera?

Q. I'm looking for a new camera that's around $100 or $120 I know that's not a lot but does anyone know a really nice digital camera please...?

A. Choose any Canon, Nikon, Samsung, Pentax, Panasonic or Sony. All 2012 and 2013 digital camera models are very powerful. Go to a store and put your hands on different cameras. See which cameras are within your budget and feel good. Any camera you buy will not disappoint you as long as you use it in good light. Most under $150 cameras will not work well in shooting fast moving objects indoor or taking photos in dull light. For that you will need to spend more than $500.
Now besides the camera, you can learn some basic photography lessons and get the most out of your powerful camera. Search the Internet and learn about Exposure Compensation, Multiple shots (fps), Timer, Bracketing, proper use of flash. Also use tripod and take photos with low ISO for stationary objects or for landscapes.
If you train yourself, any camera will help you get nice photos in most situations.
Good luck.

Original Question

Powered by Yahoo! Answers