randall1959

My Feedback: (11)

I use a Samsung 201 Digimax for aerial photography and a Nikon 3700 coolpix for aerial video.
Here is a link to video I did with the Nikon

http://www.hustjona.com/randall/VIDEO/DSCN0120.wmv

And at bottom are photos I did with the Samsung.

Jimmbbo

Bought a Nikon Cookpix 3100 (3.1 MP) - a couple of years ago. Takes great pix, uses rechargeable AA batts - small and light - overall a great, trouble free, take wherever you go, semi-upscale point and shoot camera. Add some time in Photoshop and the results are really outstanding!

Since a DSLR finally became (cough!!) affordable, I got a Nikon D70 and have forsaken film completely for the magic of digital SLR photography. The D70 is just a bit larger , heavier and complex [X(] than the 3100, but have had a love affair with Nikon SLRs since I bought my first Nikon F in the PX in Da Nang, so just HAD to have one ...

marwen1

My Feedback: (6)

outlaw - do you have one that works? I'll bet you any kind of "whatever" that we could get it to work --- on-line

if you do - PM me --- we could have some fun

marwen

weasel33

I use this one
with a 70-300 image stabilised lens
this shot is from Florida jets 2005

Brian

marwen1

My Feedback: (6)

Anyone can use whatever camera they wish to choose. In fact, if you shot an image with a 4"x5" still camera - you can still post whatever you want. It's not the camera, it is the FILE type that you upload. Take that 4'x5" negative. Print out a 8"x10" photgraph, scan it and simply save it as a jpg. Before saving it - drop the size down - severely.

I have acouple of SONY CYBERSHOT cameras. (2.1 MP & 8MP)
alont with about 10 =11 film stled cameras.

Think about it - you could even use a POLAROID camera


marwen

JWN

My Feedback: (42)

I have been using a Nikon 995 for the past 3 years and have taken a lot of very nice pictures. However, I am currently upgrading to a Nikon D70 and expect to have it in my hands in just a couple of days. While the 995 is a great point and shoot camera, you almost have to use it in manual mode to get the great shots. I expect the D70 to be much the same, but I will have a lot more options as far a lenses and flashes go with the D70. In addition, it is much faster to turn on and aquire focus than the 995. The 995 is a great camera to carry around and take pictures with, but it's not a fast camera any means.

John

Fly-guy

I have a Fuji Finepix S5000, now superceeded by the 5500 but still an excellent camera. More zoom than you can poke a stick at (22x to be precise) and a nice fast shutter speed or even a 5 quick shot mode whcih is useful for those damn fast planes or action shots, it really gives an interesting looking at a roll too. Here is a few varying types of pics. What Im trying to say is it takes good shot no matter what.

edit, I have some flying shots on a CD that I will post later

edit 2 That is only on picture quality setting 2, and that is out of 6 quality settings

Fly-guy

1911fan

My Feedback: (1)

I would like to add my two cents here to keep the post alive and state that I didn't know a whole lot about Digital Cameras, but after much reading I decided on the Nikon D70. It was pricey, but at Christmas time they offered 12 months no interest, and a $100 rebate.

The following pics were taken with the D70 and a 300mm Nikar ED lens.
(the pics are scaled down about 75% to post online, but since they are taken on large format setting they could be made into any size prints you want. I often make 8x10 prints and hang them in my shop and they look awesome. Seeing the pics online does not do the camera justice. Email me and I'll send you a RAW file if you want to see the clarity of the uncropped image.)

The stearman was just shot today as it made its maiden flights.


Good luck,

Larry

shaunrbell

My Feedback: (4)

Not sure if you know, but Nikon is coming out with a D70s. So you should be able to get a really good deal on an old 70 or get the new S version.

Shaun Bell

JWN

My Feedback: (42)

The S version has very little to offer over the current D70. The S ads a very slightly higher capacity battery, .2" larger LCD and wired remote shutter release. The view finder is slightly improved as well. Otherwise, same 6.1 megapixel, same focus, same aperature, same, same, same.... Get the current camera while you can. The discounts are there if you look for them and when the S is released, the price will go back up to what it was just a few months ago.

John

shaunrbell

My Feedback: (4)

Like my D2H, when the "s" version came out it was pretty cheap to get the old version. I'm still a little bitter about that lol, but it makes a good backup camera. Wonder when the D2Xs is coming out.....being I just got my D2X, maybe next week then!

Shaun Bell

JWN

My Feedback: (42)

I bought my 995 when the prices were just about rock bottom. Two weeks after I bought it, the 4500 was announced. The feature set was not enough to make me return the 995 so I could buy the more expensive 4500. Now the same thing happens with the D70. The way I see it, I'm ahead of the game by about $600.00

John

Big_Bird

My Feedback: (1)

Larry those are terrific photos of a really good looking plane. I have a question for you and the other guys. What percentage of the photos that you take just do not meet your own quality standards?

Since digital photography is so cheap compared to film, I take a lot of photos at a flyin looking for the perfect shot. I may discard as much as 50% or maybe a little more. Out of that 30% may be just the photos that I was looking for. Of course, I'm talking about flying shots. Ground shots are easy to compose and get.

Here are a few of the nicer shots from my Olympus C-750.

Ken

JWN

My Feedback: (42)

Nice shots Ken!

John

1911fan

My Feedback: (1)

After looking at the pics I posted I figured I would see if the original file would be small enough to upload. It shows so much more about the capabilities of the D70.

If you click on this photo and view it at 100% you can even see the pilots headphones!

This plane was probably 300 feet away and flying with the G-26 at almost idle.


***[:@] I just realized after posting that the board resized my pic***

Fly-guy

Ahhhh, geez. I take on average (at a club show with alot of flying and planes) about 100 photos, although I clocked up 183 at our last show[X(] And i got about 40-60 of them left. Bearing in mind I was on the flight line using 5 shot shutter mode to get those shmokin low passes I think thats not bad.

Fly-guy

marwen1

My Feedback: (6)

Hi Ken: "...so cheap compared to film." I think I used to look at it that way too. However, If we look at the overall investment - in order to view that same image on an even keel --- let's just look at the overall initial costs... camera, memory card (stick), connection cords, >> then we could look at the computer, monitor, memory, ect - but lets just stay with the shooting aparatus, at the time I bought my SONY CYBERSHOT, I paid $2000 for the camera, memory card, & USB cable.

Assuming that we can shoot without any problems (technical), for, lets say 10,000 shots -- that equates to $00.20 per shot. Good, bad, whatever. If it goes beyond those 10K shots - thats just that much more of a bonus. (It's right around there that I started to have a few minor glitches - every now and then.

What I mean by a "glitch" is - not 100%. I shot about 50-60 shots (maybe an hour of shooting team shots ---(dragon boat races) > uploaded them to the HD and when I opened the folder, it was empty). From that point on - if the shoot was really IMPORTANT, I back it up with the 35mm NIKON film.)

Regarless if these numbers do or do not coincide with any reader, we all still have a MAJOR investment in order to have the convenience of -- "let's look at it now."

Granted, it is much more convenient, prices are coming way down in comparison to when I bought my first digital camera, but any way you look at it, if one compares their digital camera system with another, please -- make sure that we compare the same features and output as well. The SONY F505 and the SONY F828 are priced much the same but the advances with each is HUGE. The F505 is 2.1MP and is now about 6 years old. The F828 is 8.0MP is relatively current and tons of newer features in comparison.

I'm quite sure there will be those among us that will disagree with my point of view - but without that initial layout of CASH in advance, we wouldn't be able to "look at it now"

If I have any kind of "pet peeve", it is a customer telling me "oh prices should be much cheaper now, -- it doesn't cost anything for film and processing now!" Hah! TRY AGAIN!!

But it sure is nice to be the one to decide whether or not to print a shot or not to print a shot. Those LABS that charge you for blurry, out of focus, fogged corners shots use the lamest of excuses, well we didn't know if you planned to shoot it that way or not, so we -------- Oh heck, don't get me started with that can of worms. LOL

IT SURE IS NICE TO SEE OUR "WORK" NOW THOUGH!

have a great day

marwen

tconnell

My Feedback: (7)

The camera I use most often is a Canon 1D MkII with either the Canon 17-40 L, 28-70 L or 70-200 2.8 L IS lens, and sometimes use the 28-135 IS len. All are very sharp. The RAW file size is in the 8 mg range and if converted to a 16 bit TIFF they are very large at around 46 mg each. We print on an Epson 7600 and make 24 x 30 prints with ease. I think the largest single print I have made lately is a 24 x 70 inch print for a local hospital.

Fly safe.

Tommy

Big_Bird

My Feedback: (1)

Here are a few flying shots that I captured at our Warbird Flyin yesterday. It was hazy.

Marwen, the guys really liked the posters.

Ken

marwen1

My Feedback: (6)

Glad you Liked them. Hah! I just read your posted message on the thread out loud--- my wife jokingly said" You should have sent a price list with them" LOL

You know, when I did them for you -- that was the furthest thing from my mind, I just wanted to share what we do well, with someone that I thought would appreciate a poster of their favorite shot.

That's strange that youpost a shot of the TRI-PLANE today. I just watched THE BLUE MAX on the history channell today. Of course, "The Red Baron" did a "bit" part within the script. Ha! Ha!

later

marwen

Live Wire

Believe or not I got one today
Fuji FinePix A330 A gift from my Middle son. Now all I have to do is learn to operate it maybe take a couple weeks but I'm persistent[>:][:@]

sfaust

My Feedback: (11)

I posted a lot of my stuff with a Fuji S2pro and Nikon D100 in the past. While waiting for the D2x, I was seduced by the dark side. I'm now shooting with a Canon 1Ds and 1D MkIIs, 300 2.8L, 70-200 2.8L IS, 24-70 2.8L, or 28-135 IS and a few other lenses. Most of this stuff is for work ([link=http://www.CypressMediaWorks.com]CypressMediaWorks[/link]), but a nice benefit is that I use it all the time for my personal work. The biggest benefit over the Nikon equipment I've noticed is the full frame sensor on the 1Ds, and 8fps for 40 frames while RAW+Jpeg on the 1D.

I've always found what makes good pictures is a sharp, crisp image with good contrast. The lens and sensor are the highest factors, as well as good technique. Rarely is it related to megapixels, especially if the end result is an 8x10 or less. A mid range camera with a good sensor and lens, coupled with good photographic technique will make excellent quality images. You don't need the latest 22mp camera with $5,000 lenses unless you are shooting with huge enlargements in mind (billboards, POS displays, etc). Even the cheapest digital SLRs with a decent lens is more than capable of excellent quality 8x10's.

With the consumer fixed lens cameras, the lens could cause some limitations due to the lack of a longer telephoto ranges, or the manufacturer trying to pack everything from a super wide to a super telephoto into one lens. Somethings just got to give, and it will be overall quality at the ends, and at wide open and stopped down apertures. If you are trying to capture the planes in flight, a digital SLR with a decent telephoto is for the most part a must have.

marwen1

My Feedback: (6)

[quote]ORIGINAL: sfaust I've always found what makes good pictures is a sharp, crisp image with good contrast. The lens and sensor are the highest factors, as well as good technique. Rarely is it related to megapixels, especially if the end result is an 8x10 or less. "TO THIS POINT - TRUE"

A mid range camera with a good sensor and lens, coupled with good photographic technique will make excellent quality images. AGAIN - TRUE


You don't need the latest 22mp camera with $5,000 lenses "unless you are shooting with huge enlargements in mind (billboards, POS displays, etc)" NOT EXACTLY.

When I take an older 2.1 MP camera trimmed to maximize my output, I transfer everything into the PC and I MUST have 2MB of data in my file per sq. ft for the expected POSTER size. What I use is "POSTERSHOP" by ONYX. This is a RIP that takes a very small file and produces a VERY large output. i.e. If I want to make a print that is 36" x 48" -- that equates to 12 sq. ft of output. All I need to guarantee an accetable quality print, is a 24MB file.

Another point to remember is to print from a TIF instead of a JPG

marwen

sfaust

My Feedback: (11)

I agree that RIPs are great when you need to print to larger file sizes, but a 4MP image RIPd image will never rival that of a 22mp captured image. However as you mentioned it will give you an 'acceptable quality' image which will be fine for many purposes.

marwen1

My Feedback: (6)

ABSOLUTELY! A lot of people don't know what a RIP does. On the flip side to what I said earlier, "if I know" that I require a great output, I'll even do a 1-1. That defeats the purpose of a RIP but then again, if it's, oh say, a 30" x 40" print @ 300dpi -=-- yikes! that would be ruff LOL! In reality, if it gets that bad, I'll allow the file to be as LARGE as I can without going stupid. Doing this, though, will insure a fabulous print.

I believe that most of the LARGE printers do a good job but too, there are quite a few that are really sick! No matter what you do!

I have an older ENCAD that does four passes at 300 dpi. That does NOT sound very good in comparison to the tabletop units that lay down ink at up to 5760 x1440. (EPSON R200 & R300) The problem with this comparison is that there are a variety of WAYS to lay the ink. Some do it HOT. Some do it COLD. Some do it in different sized "droplets" called "picolitres" (I think that how they spell it) (that is just the nomenclature for the droplet)

Mine does it with heat. in fact, I have gone into the system internally and INCREASED the voltage of the firing of the ink jet cartidges. Consequently, this has bumped up the end result so that my 300 dpi does almost double that. So now, that 600 x 4 passes gives me the end result that looks akin to the top end of an EPSON 870 that uses their High Gloss media.

Now that we bring up MEDIA -- oh heck --- that just opens up another whle can of worms LOL

By the way readers, you can get a RIP for those "just HUGE" files for a desktop printer. Check them out well. A lot of them won't do what they claim.

Have a GREAT DAY!


marwen