thats right, what brand are you using? and why do you use them?

was gonna run a poll, but SSC is retarded.

anyways,

I'm using Nikon

anyone using a Hasselblad? lol

Lowepro bag

Canon camera and lenses (save for a Russian FE).

Crumpler bags.

Canon Digital Rebel XTi, kit lens, using a backpack as a carrying bag (I'll have this in a month or less)

Nikon baby! lovely ol' Nikon!... D80 to be exact

Nikon (D200, D50 and Coolpix 2100) and Fuji (Finepix S7000Z). I also have an older 35mm Nikon N4004.

Nikon (D80), (F55 earlier) - because I got a Nikon F55 for Christmas and I realized that it's a great brand, so I bought a D80 this year. The general settings of the Nikon cameras are the same so that is another reason for my choice.

proud canonite!:banana:

Canon camera and lenses
I use it too

Canon camera and lenses (save for a Russian FE).

Crumpler bags.

They sell Crumpler bags outside of Australia?

never knew that.

Nikon. :master:

They sell Crumpler bags outside of Australia?

never knew that.

Well I got my first Crumpler bag from eBay when it was still only sold in Australia I think, about a year and a half ago. They've grown enormously since. There are now 5 Crumpler stores in Holland alone, and a 6th one opening soon. I have a shoulderbag and now also a larger backpack. Really nice stuff.

never have a DSLR, but it would probably be a NIKON :X

Nikon D70/s Nikkor AF-S 300mm f/4, Nikkor 18-200 mm VR f/3.5-5.6

now saving money for the Nikon D200 and Nikkor 70-200mm VR f/2.8

Nikon D80

Nikon

FUJIFILM
FinePix f30
6.3 MegaPixels


ISO Certified :P

canon

nikon d80

Nikon F80 for film photography
Fujifilm finepix s5200
and tomorrow, if all goes well, I'm getting Nikon d40x from costco. I'm so excited !!!

Canon 400D

Canon Digital Rebel Xti

Konica Minolta Dynax 7D and Lowepro rucksack.

nikon d70, i want to upgrade soon.

In order of most used:
Canon (350D, 400D)
Fuji (F30)
Olympus (OM1)
Ricoh Rangefinder
Praktica MLT5

Canon EOS 400D.

Canon 30D

Sony Alpha100

Sony Alpha100
And how do you like it?

yea really, how are those new Sony's

I know they took over Konica Minolta so they should be good.

for those using the Canon 30D...how does that unit do?

Canon, of course :D
Canon 30D, some canon lenses and one tokina wide-angle. Also I've got a Sigma flash, and some Lowepro bags.

which is better? canon or sony?

which is better? canon or sony?We'll answer that one once we've resolved Coke vs Pepsi :)

Sony DSC T30

EOS 350D

which is better? canon or sony?
http://www.flickr.com/cameras/Here good link for compare, Canon for night pic and Sony for natural light pic.

I am using Nikon.

And how do you like it?

Quite a lot, I've it since october 2006 and I'm really satisfied.

I have an Olympus Evolt E-500. I like it's simplicity. Besides, I'm not much of a photographer. I'm trying to learn though. Before that I had a Canon PowerShot SD630 point and shoot.

I can obviously tell the difference in cameras. But I need to learn to use this one better. Is there a thread where I can get photos critiqued?

^^ Does anyone here have this camera? If so, or if you've ever had it. Can you give me any advice on using this camera. I know it's difficult. But I have never used an SLR before this one. I only have the two lenses that came with the camera as well as a cheap wide angle that I bought. I'm not completely sure how to use the macro either.

haldcottingham

WZ1 (member SSC) has the same camera...he shoots Toronto and Hamilton very well and is using a few lenses himself.

I'm not familiar with the E500 by Olympus but all DSLRs are pretty much the same as they all work on the same idea.

Yes...post photos here and they will get some feedback I'm sure.

here is the link to Matt Shavers Photography if you are interested in seeing what the E500 can do.

http://mattshaverphotography.zenfolio.com/

^^ Thanks for the assist BuffCity

I use a Canon Rebel XT at the moment. The main lens I use is a fixed focal length wide angle 24mm 2.8. Next favorite is my 50mm. I've got the standard kit lens for both the digital XT and the film XT and they're both crap... I've also got the standard issue 45-300 telephoto - also crap. I make do though... it's a fantastic camera and I've achieved great results with it. I'll be moving on soon though. I'm buying a Canon 10D in the next month or so. After that, Hasselblad. Haha, right.

^^ Mark, your photos are just awesome. What photo editing program do you use? The colors are outstanding!

Yes...post photos here and they will get some feedback I'm sure.




Here are a few, let me know what I can be doing better please anyone.

Sunset in Waikiki
http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e42/haldcottingham/Hawaii.jpg
Spider at the Toledo Zoo
http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e42/haldcottingham/Spider.jpg
Red Panda at the Central Park Zoo
http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e42/haldcottingham/RedPanda.jpg

I will take any and all criticism on these. I'm the biggest amateur in the world. The first was taken with a Canon SD630 point and shoot and the second two were taken with my Olympus E-500 DSLR.

Nikon D50 and D200

Nikon 17-55 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8 VR

Tamron 90 Macro f2.8

Nikon SB600 and SB800

Sandisk extreme 3 CF

Lowepro Slingshot 200

We realy should have a poll attached to this forum so that some statistics could be generated...
Proud Nikonian here:
D70,
D200,
Nikkor AF-S DX 18-70 f3,5-4,5 G
Nikkor AF-S DX 18-200 f3,5-5,6 VR
Sigma EX APO HSM 70-200 f2,8
Nikon SB600
Canon has better sensors, but you just can not beat Nikon's ergonomics and built quality!

Sony Alpha 100, plus 3 lenses:
- standard sony 18-70
- Sigma 70-300 DG APO
- Sony 50/1.4 -> amazing lense

The alpha is an amazing machine, its only problem is high noise at 800 to 1600 iso but I don't use those high iso settings. With a good tripod, you can make some fine night pictures.

Even hand held with a good lense:


http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/6840/dsc06631copykg2.jpg


http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/1571/dsc06663copyfb6.jpg


http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/5496/dsc06589copybj5.jpg

(All pics taken in Vienna without tripod using the Sony 50/1.4 lens)


You can see some more pics taken with the alpha in my signature's link

What's the point of owning an expensive DSLR, if you have no clue how to use one?

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1199/863036078_e6c6dbd95e.jpg?v=1184999957

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/184/414551209_b65f0a1a56.jpg?v=1173380669

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/201/490608427_4c16ead48e.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/57/197709823_aa1a95588a.jpg?v=0

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/89/280642166_d871c25d0b.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/95/260520936_e263916d6d.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/82/255958962_ddc280677f.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/45/144367027_586cc457fd.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/34/71336327_1784b07709.jpg

Great shots Plastic!!
BTW, whom were those words targeted at?? eh?? :-)
Of are you just fishing for well deserved compliment?
So what camera you've taken those masterpieces with? I give you that those are soooo much more than just A PICTURE taken with A CAMERA (no matter what make or model)

What's the point of owning an expensive DSLR, if you have no clue how to use one?Maybe to learn how to use it and gain said clue?

Nice pics, shame you made 'em private so I couldn't check out the rest of your Flickr stream :(

What's the point of owning an expensive DSLR, if you have no clue how to use one?


Considering my post and some of my pics are right above this comment, I can't help feeling those words were targeted to me...

The pics I posted were of course nothing to brag about, just some pics taken by night of some monuments, not overly photoshopped to give them any of those "artsy" look, and just here to illustrate the fact the alpha 100 can give some good results by night too (one of the main critic given to it being high noise at high iso).

But thanks for your pictorial contribution which is much more interesting than your textual one! :)

Your second and last pics are realy nice!

Considering my post and some of my pics are right above this comment, I can't help feeling those words were targeted to me...


I think you should really jump to such a conclusion, and your middle one is really good! Not all pictures have to be like those (style wise) posted by Plasticboy. And if you look couple of post up you'll se something that really deserved that comment...

Considering my post and some of my pics are right above this comment, I can't help feeling those words were targeted to me...

No, sir, I did not mean to offend you or anyone else posting their works in this thread for that matter. It jerks me out of my usual thought process when I witness such a mindless following of the name brands and/or pure technical debates in general i.e. "my camera vs. your camera", "I'm a proud Nikonian", or even more disturbing "my new 18-200VR something lens lets me take better pictures than my old crappy 18-200 D lens". HUH? Isn't a photographer him/herself supposed to control the whole creative process from the beginning to end and not his/her camera?

Too many amateurs who think that better cameras will improve their photos are at risk of descending to the lowest level of equipment measurbator. Too many amateurs have been misled (http://www.stunningnikon.com/picturetown/) by camera makers (http://www.stunningnikon.com/picturetown/) into thinking that they need good cameras for good images. This thought is poison to creating art. The big name camera company has successfully commercialized the art of photography. What ordinary consumers do not realize is that through a number of extensive marketing campaigns their own artistic beginnings are being discouraged and lowered in favor of buying a new make camera or a lens.

Just got a Sony Aplha 100 - still need to learn a lot, but having explored some basic possibilities, I can say that it really is a good machine. But once again, as it has been said - you need to know how to use one, or at least you have to be prepared to learn and research a lot in order to become good in using one. (like me;) )

Plasticboy, that's quite true! But this is a general problem of consumer siciety - bielief that everything and anything could be baught. Still this sad fact doesn't mean that we have to dive into another extreme. Cameras, lenses etc are tools to aquire the source/raw material for creative process. Better equipment allows for wide variety of outcomes. Some specifications allow for extra creative ways. Better cameras and lenses don't take better pictures, people take better pictures, but better cameras and lenses help. How much is a topic worthy debate. Just because of all the advertising which in essence trying to sell us worthles crap like number pixels and so on. People should be able to see past it to know what properties are worth paying (for the needs of particular individual) and what are totally usless.

Canon EOS 10D

Considering my post and some of my pics are right above this comment, I can't help feeling those words were targeted to me...

The pics I posted were of course nothing to brag about, just some pics taken by night of some monuments, not overly photoshopped to give them any of those "artsy" look, and just here to illustrate the fact the alpha 100 can give some good results by night too (one of the main critic given to it being high noise at high iso).

But thanks for your pictorial contribution which is much more interesting than your textual one! :)

Your second and last pics are realy nice!


He was talking to me I'm sure. That's cool though. My wife bought me a camera and I'm not supposed to use it I guess. Oh well. Constructive or not, it was definitely criticism.

Canon EOS 40D, Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM (an old one, thinking of replacement), Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM, Sigma AF 10-20mm f/4-5.6 HSM EX DC