nate_cowlishaw Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 I'm not too crazy about the zoom lenses on Digicams, but I am too strapped for a DSLR at the moment. I'm looking for good color saturation as well as a camera that doesn't over-saturate the colors. I've been looking at dozens of differant 5mp cameras, and well as reading several reviews on differant models. And in the end, I am back where I started! So any advice could be helpful. My main desire, is to find a Digicam that is worthy of good landscape work, because I will be using it a lot in the boonies. I also have a second-hand interest in shooting Digital Infrared images. Nate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GerrySiegel Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 Nate,thinking outside der box, if you will, have you considered one of the Zeiss Tessar 100mm equipped used plentiful MF black boxes with a roll film back and a new modest flatbed Epson scanner. At this point in history it might just work for you. And it has a very long track record. Price to get into digitized hybrid would be about 600 to 700 dollars and result in large superb files. IR film is plentiful. Bulk film is still supported by the two biggies, at least that is the latest Wall Street report on Kodak and Fuji. Hope this doesnt trash your original dream but offers another approach :-)Aloha, GS<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GerrySiegel Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 Oh yes, this is also boonie friendly, like a Bradley tank. And the weight, well, just imagine Ansel or our GI's in their light Kevlar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m_. Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 the best? Canon 1Ds probably will take the honor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babo Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 Nate, I'm prefer the Sigma SD10 with EX prime lens. The Foveon sensor is a very capable device for capturing fine details. At pbase you can check hundreds of full size images from Sigma owners, take a look! First try <a href="http://www.pbase.com/image/23871888/original">this</a> image, <a href="http://www.pbase.com/lmatson">Laurence Matson</a>, <a href="http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/seng_sphomphanh_sd10">Seng Sphomphanh</a>, <a href="http://www.pbase.com/rickdecker">Rick Decker</a> and <a href="http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/david_hughes">David Hughes</a> images are just a few selected samples of the <a href="http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/sd10">SD10</a> and <a href="http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/sd9">SD9</a> galleries. For Sigma DSLR questions the best forum is on <a href="http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1027">dpreview</a>. I hope this helps! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick_helmke Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 Nate I think the answer is don't go digital until you can afford to get a versatile camera. To me anyway this means a DSLR. Otherwise go with film until you can swing a more capable camera than a digicam. I'm still regularly suprised at how good the results are from scanned negs. I think if you get in to digital now you are going to be disappointed and will have spent $$ you could have put toward a 300D or D70. But that's me. Rick H. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carl smith Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 Since you don't recommend a budget I would recommend getting the Canon 300D. It has a bigger sensor than any of the point and shoots which will give you better noise characteristics. Additionally it is an SLR so you get a variety of lenses to choose from. The kit lens, when stopped down, would be fine for landscapes, alternatively you could get the 50 1.8 which is a superb lens and costs less than the kit lens. The combination of the 300D with the kit lens is $1000 and the combination of the 300D with the 50 1.8 would be aroun $970 or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_flaherty Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 Of course, a digital SLR (specifically, the Canon 1Ds) is the only good response to your subject line question..."Best Digital Camera for Serious Landscape Work." But other DSLR's will give generally good results, too. Just not the "Best." Now, if you're talking prosumer rangefinder-type or EVF cameras, there are several which will produce reasonably good results. Your concerns about "over saturation" are really not generally camera issues. They're camera "setting" issues. After all, any serious shooter knows that shooting the shot is only 1/2 (or less) of the job; it's how you manipulate the image in Photoshop that produces the results that people aspire to achieve. Get a model that'll let you adjust color saturation, contrast, sharpness, etc. Then YOU do the controlling in Photoshop. The Olympus C5050 Zoom is a fine little camera and will do the job very well, if you're strapped for money. Since I'm not into infrared imaging, I can't offer advice there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carl smith Posted January 6, 2004 Share Posted January 6, 2004 The absolute positive best 35mm SLR based DSLR for your uses would be the Canon 1Ds, but since you're talking about 5 megapixel point and shoots I guess you probably aren't going to pay that much. Right? Do come back and let us know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nate_cowlishaw Posted January 6, 2004 Author Share Posted January 6, 2004 I wasn't thinking totally about purchasing a DSLR, I would just like to expirience digital. I would like to know if the standard digicams ARE capable of quality work, especially when playing around with near infrared photography. For some reason too, I have a certain prejudice against Photoshop, so manipulating a photo too much seems to violate my morals. I enjoy using Photoshop to fix scratches in a photo, or adding a little contrast after scanning photos. What appeals to me about digital, is the simplicity in doing photography in a differant way. One thing that appeals to me about Digicams, is they offer a Black & White / Sepia mode. I was over at the local wal-mart the other day, and noticed that when you switched the modes on some digicams to Black and White, the LCD screen also goes B&W. For me, this would let me see the world in Black and White, much like a film SLR with a red filter! :) I believe the quality of pictures is based on the skill of the Photographer. But at the same time, I'd like a camera that could perform well and meet the basic standards for quality. For Digital itself, it's hard to measure qaulity sometimes. If I were to invest in a large DSLR, three years down the road, they will have something far more advanced. It's kind of like the Computer frenzy, every year new technology is growing fast! Film is incredibly stable, and I hope that doesn't change. Because, I enjoy traditional photography. For me, Digital is a differant artform, or medium even in the bounds of Photography. The Digital Darkroom looks foreign, and is hard for me to agree with. For all it's worth though, I would like to try Digital and keep the Photographs unmanipulated if possible. Photoshop can be used to add "minor" adjustments if ever needed. Nate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nate_cowlishaw Posted January 6, 2004 Author Share Posted January 6, 2004 I forgot to mention that DSLRs don't allow you to shoot a B&W mode from the camera. If you want B&W images, you have to make the adjustments in Photoshop. I'd prefer do B&W straight from the camera. Nate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GerrySiegel Posted January 6, 2004 Share Posted January 6, 2004 A conundrum if there ever was one Nate babe-is that the right word,.. Or a quandary at least,maybe a quagmire even. "I want to try it but I am afraid to make the plunge because it may not satisfy me. I bare my insecurities to the world about this digital mania." This is a life long commitment,already,like buying a puppy? Nate, get an Olympus Camedia C5050, even used one. If you don't like it send it back to KEH. Or,well, Bob Atkins and I can run a bake sale to help you pay off credit card.Seriously, you have forgotten the fun of experimenting because you are waiting for Godot or you are just too fussy. Confess about that draw full of accessories you rarely use right now! Now, honestly,would your real photofriends next door be candid like that or more circumspect,-stuff your prejudices about PS,thats bullhockey and you must know that by now. An excuse to not learn.Yet,Nate, best luck as I exit your interesting thread with my digicam in hand. No biggee. May trade winds follow you always, your photofriend in alohaland, Gerry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_flaherty Posted January 6, 2004 Share Posted January 6, 2004 That, Sir, is ridiculous (IMHO). One of the world's finest photographers, Ansel Adams, was a serious manipulator of his images. He did his "trickery" in a true darkroom. He would have LOVED Photoshop. A good photographer knows how to make the most of his tools, including Photoshop. Making your images all they can be is not "cheating." It's what photography is all about. Ask ANY pro. I dare say that non would embrace your feelings on this matter. My better images are made to look as good as they can be with both camera and Photoshop. And how I produced the prints others enjoy is nobody's business but mine. Sorry for the rant, but this kind of stuff gets to me. Happy New Year! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nate_cowlishaw Posted January 6, 2004 Author Share Posted January 6, 2004 "That, Sir, is ridiculous (IMHO). One of the world's finest photographers, Ansel Adams, was a serious manipulator of his images. He did his "trickery" in a true darkroom. He would have LOVED Photoshop." ---There's nothing wrong with manipulating photographs in a traditional dark room. MY OPINION IS, Photography deals with "Silver Crystals", and Digital Images are made with Digits; My belief is that Traditional Photography and Digital Imaging will go into two differant directions. Personally, I've always had deep respect for Ansel Adams but I cannot speak for him. I've only recently taken a serious interest to learn the Zone System, and am learning everything about the craft of taking good pictures. "A good photographer knows how to make the most of his tools, including Photoshop. Making your images all they can be is not "cheating." It's what photography is all about. Ask ANY pro. I dare say that non would embrace your feelings on this matter." ---I'm sure there are a few people who could disagree with your statement. I think it is my responsibility to follow my own shadow in this world. Ansel had his, and so does every person that believes in themselves. I've only been doing Photography for about two years now, and I have yet to learn anything. Maybe my bias is saddening to some, but I don't think it's a harmful trait to the way I see Photography. Even if people want to manipulate their photographs beyond recognition, then I would uphold their Expression to do so. "My better images are made to look as good as they can be with both camera and Photoshop. And how I produced the prints others enjoy is nobody's business but mine. Sorry for the rant, but this kind of stuff gets to me. Happy New Year!" ---Then that is your perogative. There is no reason for you to be upset by anything that was said. We all view things in differant ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beauh44 Posted January 6, 2004 Share Posted January 6, 2004 >>I've only been doing Photography for about two years now, and I have yet to learn anything. Heh, heh . . . Sorry - that just struck my funny bone. Best wishes . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nate_cowlishaw Posted January 7, 2004 Author Share Posted January 7, 2004 Beau - My first camera was a Canon Rebel X, when I was 17. I was a point & Shooter, but I'll have to admit, it's been quite recently that I've wanted to take photographs. And after reading through this thread, it's quite obvious that I am a little naive, even I can notice that. LOL. Nate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now