Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Nicely done
Lamp post is a great shot. I would try it in Portrait (instead of landscape) next time, though.
Just my opinion, but I think you are being too critical of yourself on that photo. I really liked your use of depth of field and to me the angle of the fence adds interest. An interesting self portrait idea might have been a single large, silver Christmas ornament that gave you a distorted reflection of yourself actually taking the photo. Or maybe even just a single small red ornament to add a point of interest in the foreground since the dominant colors in the photo are already green and white. Kind of a "classic" xmas photo.
That's such a nice shot, and underscores that all rules are made to be broken. At first glance some people might suggest that you NEVER put the subject in the dead-center of a photo but in my opinion it adds to the feeling that deer is nested inside the trees surrounding it. Nicely done.
I'd go with the "Point & shoot".. Unless you have thoughts of going professional, that P&S will take very nice pictures without the need to buy additional lenses. More reviews can be found at Amazon35mm equivalent 24-840mm .. The amount of money you'd have to spend on lenses to get that range would'Chaos Commish said:
you.
Well, thanks for the links to increase my knowledge that I live in a pretty boring part of the US when it comes to places for photography
The best photo's you are going to get, regardless if it is the desert, mountains, ocean, etc. is from Predawn through sunrise and Dusk to sunset. 
I think if you aren't going to invest in several different lenses there's something to be said for going in between the two options you suggested. Mirrorless cameras that are a generation old are great values right now....http://www.cameta.com/Olympus-PEN-E-PL2-Micro-4-3-Digital-Camera-14-42mm-II-Lens-Black-Factory-Demo-59722.cfm?utm_source=Pricegrabber&utm_medium=cpchttp://www.adorama.com/INK1J1BKR.html?utm_term=Other&utm_medium=Shopping%20Site&utm_campaign=Other&utm_source=pgrabl... both come in at well under $300 for the body/lens with the flexibility to add a wide, fast prime lens later that would be ideal for taking those dramatic low-light desert shots. If you plan on taking more static shots I'd lean toward the Olympus but if you thought you might be taking more action shots(children running/playing, flying birds, dune buggies kicking up sand, etc) then I'd lean more toward the Nikon. The Nikon has a very fast maximum shutter speed and fast focusing, but a smaller sensor. The Nikon is much smaller but that may have to do with a smaller battery which only takes 2/3rds the number of shots on a single charge when compared to the Olympus.'Chaos Commish said:
Interesting choice there and it is all about the cost( about $200 more) and if it is worth it to you.With the Panasonic you do get all REAL nice aperture throughout the range of the camera:
Can't speak for Snogs but I LOVE Panasonic point and shoots and think they are every bit as good as the Canon/Nikon/Sony P&S's of the world. Throw in the fact that it has F2.8 through the entire 25-600mm(equivelant) zoom range and imo it's the best super zoom camera on the market. The only drawback I see is it's pretty new to the market so you are paying close to MSRP and point-and-shoot camera prices fall fast. If you buy now you could probably miss out on a GREAT deal in less than a year.
Thanks again. I'm now looking for $300 w/RAW. And, know that I deal with 2 and a half months of 100-110+ degree weather.Well, thanks for the links to increase my knowledge that I live in a pretty boring part of the US when it comes to places for photography
Best tool I have found, bar none, for researching areas to take photos is The Photographer’s Ephemeris (TPE) I use teh windows one which is free, but they have Apps available also.
The great thing is you can place a marker on the screen and it will not only show you the time that the sun will rise/fall, but also the direction.. here is an example I saved
I think that F2.8@600mm >> F5.8@840mm in most shooting situations though. The only exceptions might be if you have a very nice(read: expensive and heavy) tripod AND a ton of light(which often doesn't lend itself to be the best light for photographs). If you were next to a road side so you weren't carrying the tripod and needed that extra reach(like taking photos of rams on the side of hillside where you typically have a lot of light) then I can see where the Canon would be better.
I'm a Canon shooter, and I like the above advice. I have a friend that has a Canon P&S like the SX40 but one generation older. It's quick to zoom and takes 'good enough' pictures, but it's still obvious the quality between P&S shots and SLR. I'd probably jump in the Olympus or Sony mirrorless SLR camp if I wasn't invested with Canon lenses and stuff.
I like the idea of mirrorless, and yes it does save you money compared to a DSLR.. But you still will need to purchases lenses to get the different ranges, which equals more money..I've seen P&S pictures taken with the new 12 and above MP cameras blown up to 8X10 which look great.. I think A LOT is... what are you going to do with the pictures?Post on Facebook/flickr for people to view online, Print out mainly 4X6's and 5X7's with the occasional 8X10.. Then I think a top of the line P&S is perfect.Or do you hope to print 11X14 or larger? If so, then a Mirrorless camera or DSLR is the way to go.Just be prepared to be constantly watching for new lenses that you can afford and, well, the
that comes from the Significant other because of it.
Not sure if you're a Costco member or not:http://www.costco.com/Olympus-E-PL2-with-14-42mm-Lens-Compact-System-Camera-Bundle.product.100011392.html
Based on the fact you are really aimed at scenic shots and focus speed, shutter speed will be very small factors in your photo I'd get this if I was you...http://www.uniquephoto.com/Sony-1/alpha-nex-c3-digital-camera-with-16mm-wide-angle-lens-black-nexc3a-b/?scpid=2&scid=scsho774482... because it comes with the 16mm/F2.8 lens.It has a bigger sensor and more megapixels than my other suggestions. The NEX line of cameras have been very well received and in a few years you could use your lenses on another ~$200-300 NEX camera that I'm sure will be better than anything available today. For shooting scenery it's all about the lens and sensor. Two accessories that will help you get the best possible pictures for scenery are an ok tripod(another great benefit of mirrorless - the cameras are so light you don't need a heavy tripod) and a polarizing filter that really gives you blue skies to set off those warm desert colors.Best of luck!
I think you make a great point when considering the final output but I would argue P&S can take great pictures PROVIDED you have a great deal of light to work with. Some of my favorite scenic shots are taken close to dawn and dusk and at least in my experience P&S tend to struggle when getting all(sometimes ANY) details in the shadows. HDR can be a tool to combat this but a bigger sensor and a lens that allows more light to hit the sensor is the best way to really capture that detail. The nice thing about these high megapixel mirrorless cameras are they offer so many more megapixels than you really need. For instance sharing photos online you really only need 4mp or less. You can crop your 16mp image down to 4mp allowing you to treat the crop as a zoom. In the old days when you only had 4mp to start out with digital zoom was a gimmick but now that we have so many more mp's than we really need it can be used as a valuable tool to avoid buying so many lenses. Imo these mirrorless cameras are a perfect solution for people that just want one zoom lens and one fast pancake prime. If people really want to invest $1,000+ in a collection of several lenses that they may keep a lifetime then dSLR is the best bet... at least for now. The clock is ticking.But you still will need to purchases lenses to get the different ranges, which equals more money..I've seen P&S pictures taken with the new 12 and above MP cameras blown up to 8X10 which look great.. I think A LOT is... what are you going to do with the pictures?
After a week + of spending some time daily researching this idea, the above suggestion is easily my choice. The Price + Image Quality combo can't be topped and I guess those are my two main considerations. So, some questions before I take the plunge or not.What can I do and not do with the 14x42mm kit lens?
14-42 will not give you much "zoom." That is, if you see some pretty bird on the opposite bank, you'll have to be content to have it be a mere speck in your photo. Personally, I'm fine with that. The last time I shot over 50 mm was wedding work. If you're doing landscapes and the occasional shot of your kid, 14-42 will have you covered.As far as accessories, you can get a tripod pretty cheap—$50 or so for a decently sturdy, easy-to-use tripod. I'm also a big advocate of buying a "nifty 50" or a 35 mm 1.8 prime early on. Both are great lenses and are fairly affordable. You will get your money's worth with either one.
It will work well for the type of photography you are talking about, mostly landscapes with some light to work with. Sounds like you aren't interested in telephoto, so that's a weakness of no consequence to you. You'll likely need to use some combination of flash/tripod/high iso if you're shooting indoors unless you are very strategic about it. It won't give you that ultra-wide effect that you may eventually want, but there's no inexpensive way to get that. Generally my advice is live with that lens for several months and wait to see if there's a type of photo you would really like to take but can't. Only buy lenses when they are a tool to solve a problem, don't buy them to cover a range(I have to get a telephoto, I have to get a prime, I have to get an ultra-wide, etc). I agree with pantagrapher and shoot with my prime lens more than any other, but we may shoot different shots than you do.As far as low cost accessories:
Very well said.If anything, when you are blessed with a beautiful sunrise/sunset consider it a challenge to find a foreground that frames the sky in such a way to take advantage of all that beautiful light. You're often racing against the clock so it can be quite a challenge. I've never once grown tired of viewing a spectacular sunset or sunrise - be it on a digital screen, or a print, or best yet in person.
In the end it comes down to how you take the photos(lighting, angles, framing, etc..) and not as much on the amount you spend on the camera. Back in 2006 I started with, by today's standards, a crappy HP 4MP Point & Shoot camera and they still look good on the walls in our basement.here are a few:Rays light the wayMorning Arrivalearly birdDon't ever let anyone talk you into making a purchase. If you're not sure if you need a new tech toy, the answer is you probably don't really need it. Another way to go about it is purchasing a few accessories that you can use now with your current camera and will come in handy when you eventually do plan on purchasing a new camera(tripod, head, extra memory cards, etc). Point-and-shoots benefit a great deal from a tripod because they typically perform best at a low ISO(each model has their own "sweet spot"). You can also play around with HDR photography with your current camera and you may be surprised in what a big difference they add to landscape photos in a high contrast setting like the desert.Many people think the best time to purchase a new camera is the FEB-MAR time frame anyway, as retailers make room for new cameras. I'm not sure if that's really true as the best deals just come out of the blue in my experience. It sounds like you've done your research so you have a short list already. Just sit back and wait for a deal that is so good on one of those cameras you simply can't pass it up. Sooner or later that deal will come along.I will say this though, for the type of photography you've described the kit lens will absolutely work well. You don't NEED a prime to do it. If the only thing holding you back from making the jump to a better camera(bigger sensor/etc) is the fact you can't afford a prime lens I wouldn't let that hold you back from eventually making a purchase.Best of luck!
I personally think you'll be so impressed with the pictures that you'll get with the default kit that it will take a long time before you get lens envy.
Tripod, filter and cap kit, remote shutter release, extra battery, 2 8gb sd cards... $310 out the door. Happy for now.
Since it sounds like you'll be shooting landscapes with a tripod and low ISO settings I don't think you need to spend anything on software. The single best feature of LR4 imo is noise reduction and with low ISO you shouldn't have a problem with noise. LR4 is also good for organizing photos but I don't think the price is worth improved organization unless you take a TON of photos.Here's one list...http://techenter.com/top-10-best-free-photo-editing-software-2013/... but there are probably 50 great free photo editing programs out there. It's kind of incredible. I'd start with Paint.NET but it's personal preference what works best for you. Some people like to take their best photo and play with it for hours with GIMP, others want to take an entire folder of keepers and "optimize" all of them quickly with a program like PhotoPerfect Express. I still use IrfanView when I first dump all the photos off the memory card and end up deleting ~75+%. It's always been so lean and fast even when dealing with RAW photos. Again, a lot of personal preference.Youtube is a great resource to get free tutorials how to use different software packages. If there's something specific you know you'll want to do with your photos search for a youtube tutorial and choose the software package that looks the most intuitive.'Chaos Commish said:
You also have a dust speck about an inch from the top, just left of center. Easy to miss cuz it's in the clouds.
Good catch. Changing lenses on a slightly windy beach is risky. I'll take the little speck in the clouds. My shots aren't any more than just a hobby. Sunsets are the only shots I'm decent at...I suck at picking out abstract/original material like you. So yeah...I can deal with a speck.
Just another example of very good free software online(for a limited time at least) Cyberlink Photo Director 3....http://download.cnet.com/8301-32471_4-57566732-10391713/exclusive-free-giveaway-of-cyberlink-photodirector-3/I downloaded it and gave it a try mostly to test the "touch up" feature on portraits. I'm pretty impressed. Nothing you couldn't do on PhotoShop CS2 but the process seems a little streamlined. I was hoping it would rival Portrait Professional 11 but it's not on that level. I don't take a ton of portraits otherwise I'd probably just spend the $40 for that program if I needed to "fix" a lot of portraits quickly/easily without spending all the time PhotoShop takes.
I'm not sure if you've already pulled the trigger or not but I saw the Panasonic FZ200 for $419(free shipping) and it made me think of this thread....http://slickdeals.net/f/5850474-Panasonic-LUMIX-DMC-FZ200-12mp-419-w-promo-FS... you do give up a lot with the point-and-shoot sensor but if you want a 600mm F2.8 lens it's a pretty good deal since the dSLR version would be the size of a bazooka and cost about as much as a car.It has a lot of very good reviews and when it comes to high end P&S's I'm completely biased toward Panasonic.
IMO sometimes dead center is needed to get the true "feeling".. Rules are meant to be broken 
