Anyone else here a photographer, sorry not a phone photographer, I'm talking (in this instance) DSLRs etc
Yes sure. I started when I was 7 with a Canon QL25 rangefinder which I used until I was teenager and old enough to "earn a few bob" at which point I bought a 2nd hand Nikon FE with 50mm f/2. That started a long time love of photography (and equipment purchases and lens collection) as well as a branch in to sports videography and Astro. Except for my first camera I remain a semi-devout Nikonian, excepting some Canon video gear and some mirrorless bodies.
BTW As far as effect or conversion filters for some of those large Front element wide angles are concerned, I've always thought it would be easier to incorporate these behind the rear element, space permitting. There is sometimes up to 5mm between the rear element and the mirror where this might be possible and Nikon did this with some of their manual focus ultra wide (and telephoto) lenses. Of course if one wants a clear protective filter that's a different story as it needs to be up front.
Yes I enjoy photography even these days.
I started with a old box camera that was around before the "Brownie Box " camera. I pushed it to a decent limit doing various time exposures which in my world was unheard of...I can't list the cameras after that.
Funny you mention not phone photography.
My daughter said she wanted a phone and said mainly for a camera. She had won a small digital in a photographic competition years ago and had some other small digital cameras. I offered her my old Canon DSLR which has the two "kit lens" ...she declined saying that as the phone was so portable she felt she would use it more..I tried to tell her how much better the DSLR was and that she could use it and buy a much cheaper phone...well she bought the phone and it has two front lenses and frankly the photos she is taking blow me away...close ups no problem..some of her insect shots are magnificent as are her flowers...but she does seem to have the knack or the eye to capture stuff that just makes it appealing.
Anyways I got me one of those twin lens phone and found it will do up to a 60x zoom which of course is not optical but the images are way past my expectations...
Alex
Yes sure. I started when I was 7 with a Canon QL25 rangefinder which I used until I was teenager and old enough to "earn a few bob" at which point I bought a 2nd hand Nikon FE with 50mm f/2. That started a long time love of photography (and equipment purchases and lens collection) as well as a branch in to sports videography and Astro. Except for my first camera I remain a semi-devout Nikonian, excepting some Canon video gear and some mirrorless bodies.
BTW As far as effect or conversion filters for some of those large Front element wide angles are concerned, I've always thought it would be easier to incorporate these behind the rear element, space permitting. There is sometimes up to 5mm between the rear element and the mirror where this might be possible and Nikon did this with some of their manual focus ultra wide (and telephoto) lenses. Of course if one wants a clear protective filter that's a different story as it needs to be up front.
Best
JA
Trouble is that you need to rotate polarising filters and graduated filters for landscapes need raising/lowering/rotating so behind the lens is no good
Yes I enjoy photography even these days.
I started with a old box camera that was around before the "Brownie Box " camera. I pushed it to a decent limit doing various time exposures which in my world was unheard of...I can't list the cameras after that.
Funny you mention not phone photography.
My daughter said she wanted a phone and said mainly for a camera. She had won a small digital in a photographic competition years ago and had some other small digital cameras. I offered her my old Canon DSLR which has the two "kit lens" ...she declined saying that as the phone was so portable she felt she would use it more..I tried to tell her how much better the DSLR was and that she could use it and buy a much cheaper phone...well she bought the phone and it has two front lenses and frankly the photos she is taking blow me away...close ups no problem..some of her insect shots are magnificent as are her flowers...but she does seem to have the knack or the eye to capture stuff that just makes it appealing.
Anyways I got me one of those twin lens phone and found it will do up to a 60x zoom which of course is not optical but the images are way past my expectations...
Alex
I don't dismiss phones (just here) they it is at least good to see people taking photographs, my parents never did 50 years ago so there are no records of me as a child or any of their past, I have albums of my sons growing up.
Also it is nice to hang photos on walls in the house
Yes I teach it at my place of work in a secondary school though nikon is not my brand
First "real" camera I had after a Kodak instamatic 25, then Praktica Super TL with 2.8 Tessar was a Nikkormat FTn, after that a Nikon F Apollo FTn, I had a Canon 60D, superb and to me Canon still are better in low light, but I stuck with Nikon for sentiment
Trouble is that you need to rotate polarising filters and graduated filters for landscapes need raising/lowering/rotating so behind the lens is no good
True. I was thinking more along the lines of neutral density for long exposure landscape or even light pollution filters.
First "real" camera I had after a Kodak instamatic 25, then Praktica Super TL with 2.8 Tessar was a Nikkormat FTn, after that a Nikon F Apollo FTn, I had a Canon 60D, superb and to me Canon still are better in low light, but I stuck with Nikon for sentiment
When I was a kid we used the ever reliable pentax 1000 sr's then I moved onto Konica before my foray into DSLR's and love for Canon
1. I have a filter holder made by SRB (elite) takes standard p sized square filters but has a built in thread to house a CPL that has a thumb screw to rotate it.
2. Attach a standard CPL to the lens, and manually just hold the NDG, works fine for short exposures, in fact this is my preferred method most of the time.
3. I just got a breakthrough x4 combined 3stop and CPL filter.....very sexy bit of kit! Who can wait for the golden hour, on holiday with the family!
1. I have a filter holder made by SRB (elite) takes standard p sized square filters but has a built in thread to house a CPL that has a thumb screw to rotate it.
2. Attach a standard CPL to the lens, and manually just hold the NDG, works fine for short exposures, in fact this is my preferred method most of the time.
3. I just got a breakthrough x4 combined 3stop and CPL filter.....very sexy bit of kit! Who can wait for the golden hour, on holiday with the family!
Hemi
The shame is that these lower cost filter holders don't fit wides such as the Nikkor 14-24 I used/had, my LEE set of just one mount and five filters cost close to £800
I used to have and started off with Cokin P series, great filters, not wide enough
I started with Box Brownies, much later got into SLRs starting with an Olympus OM2, OM4Ti, then NikonFM2, F3, F4S, F5, D200, Mamiya 645PRO and for the past 10 years D3.
Though I have owned many, many Nikkor zoom lenses, I now only use 3 primes, 24mmF2.8, 28mmF2.8 and 50mmF1.4
If you want to emulate ND filters with a lens like the 14-24mm Nikon simply take several shots and stack them. You'll get the same blurred water effect on waterfalls, streams etc. That's a great lens and similar to the Sigma Art 14 1.8 which has a large bulbous front element as well.
Sony A7rii has an app that does exactly that and it was popular.
I have recently used that technique and it worked well.
You need a stable resting point for the camera or a tripod. You could even vary the focus point from close to far in the several exposures to get focus stacking and a very deep depth of field.
ND filters have their own set of problems as well like some cause colour shift, some can create an X shape when pushed too hard. They are another thing to carry and clean.
For me personally, my preference is to do as much in-camera as possible, leaving only basic processing and minor tweaks for post. So, because of this, I lean more towards using physical filters instead of using stacking methods in post. Additionally, if I'm having to do bracketing or any additional stacking/masking then I can see where stacking images to create the LE effect could become tedious. I think there's great pros for each side of the argument and I think regardless of which you pick, they'll both produce the same end result for you.
I don't want to sit behind a computer but a camera
Hi Jeremy,
I started with a Kodak instamatic then in the mid 70s when I was about 8 years we were given Polaroids which we thought were fantastic but could never afford film or the cube flash.
Had a bit of a break and got the scuba bug and bought a Nikonos 5 35mm. I also had a sb102 strobe and a sea&sea slave strobe. This camera had early TTL metering. I ended up getting a 20mm wide angle lens and some macro extension tubes. This cost $1000s back then but had the real bug and went diving whenever i could even after work and getting back late at night.
I had this outfit for years and have got heaps of slides i took over the years. Again a real learning curve doing underwater photography with low light, water movement, subject movement, backscatter, and real time constraints but i loved it. I learned bracketing pretty quickly so at least 1 out of 3 shots was correct exposure at least. Still remember dropping the slide film off and waiting for that perfect shot and getting back a blurry fish tail.
To get colour bias you could use kodachrome for reds and fujichrome velvia for blues and green.
Had a work accident and did a fair bit of lung damage so had to give up diving.
I ended up selling the lot just before the digital age had fully set in but i do miss all the fantastic times i had especially with macro.
All those dives over the years and missing the tiny life thats going on all around until i did macro.
Cheers
Andy
Hi Jeremy,
I started with a Kodak instamatic then in the mid 70s when I was about 8 years we were given Polaroids which we thought were fantastic but could never afford film or the cube flash.
Had a bit of a break and got the scuba bug and bought a Nikonos 5 35mm. I also had a sb102 strobe and a sea&sea slave strobe. This camera had early TTL metering. I ended up getting a 20mm wide angle lens and some macro extension tubes. This cost $1000s back then but had the real bug and went diving whenever i could even after work and getting back late at night.
I had this outfit for years and have got heaps of slides i took over the years. Again a real learning curve doing underwater photography with low light, water movement, subject movement, backscatter, and real time constraints but i loved it. I learned bracketing pretty quickly so at least 1 out of 3 shots was correct exposure at least. Still remember dropping the slide film off and waiting for that perfect shot and getting back a blurry fish tail.
To get colour bias you could use kodachrome for reds and fujichrome velvia for blues and green.
Had a work accident and did a fair bit of lung damage so had to give up diving.
I ended up selling the lot just before the digital age had fully set in but i do miss all the fantastic times i had especially with macro.
All those dives over the years and missing the tiny life thats going on all around until i did macro.
Cheers
Andy
I tried underwater with a Canon but as with slide film it was always beyond me, needing to be so precise
