# Looking for a Camera



## Jason Nipp (Jun 10, 2004)

I am looking for a Digital Camera. I have looked at many reviews and am more flustered now than when started.

I currently have a Minolta Z1. I like the feel, substanance, and the superzoom, but I often take blurry pictures because my hands shake. I would think this has to do with slow AF and shutter time as well.

Today I took an SD card to a shop and took some pictures with a Canon SX10. Nice feel but the pics turns out blotchy/blocky. Even my wife said our current camera does a better job... and that SX10 is a $400 camera. Sheesh!

I like the feel of full bodied cameras, but never really liked SLR's, I used to have an Olympus OM10.

But it seems to me that I may have to go to an dSLR to get high quality and super fast shutter times and superior optics.

I want to spend less than $750.

I have looked at the Nikon D60 and Canon XS (maybe XSi). Is there something else I should look at? I am not a Sony fan, so I'll pass up looking at the Alpha.

My brother in law Mike has a Nikon D50, and BiL Allen has the Canon XTi. Both say they are happy, but both also had 35mm cameras they wanted to use the lenses from.

I really do not want to end up spending a fortune on lenses etc... and by no means do I even consider my self someone who even whats to compare himself to an amateur photographer... I just want some high quality pictures of my kids before they are no longer kids.

advice?


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

Nikon . . . Bought the D70 and a couple of lenses before a trip to Galapagos a few years back. Nice!


----------



## clueless (Dec 6, 2004)

You might try the D40. You can get it, the lens that comes with it and a 55-200 zoom with vibration reduction for less than your budget.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/recommended-cameras.htm


----------



## dave29 (Feb 18, 2007)

I recommend the Canon Rebel XSi for sure, and it also has "live view".
I have the previous model XTi, the stock lense, and a really good 55-250mm lense(this lense is awesome, but it was ~$300 or so)
If you have a budget of $750, You don't want a D40, the pic quality is not near as good as the XT, XTI, XS, or XSI.
If you get a nikon, get at least a d60.


----------



## Greg Alsobrook (Apr 2, 2007)

I'm a huge Canon fan. We bought an SD500 a few years back and were blown away with the quality of pictures. I've never seen a point and shoot that took DSLR quality pictures like that one. I'd be happy to email you a few samples of what I've taken with it.

I also just got an XSi for Christmas. Awesome, awesome camera... but overkill unless you're into "advanced" features. All depends on what you plan on doing with it...


----------



## barryb (Aug 27, 2007)

Canon all the way here Jason.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

If you want to do some web research, among several digicam web sites I've frequented over the years, I find the reviews at dpreview and imaging-resource to be the most informative and objective. /steve


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

Any Canon or Nikon D-SLR is going to be "acceptable". Keep in mind that the primary cost in these cameras is not the camera body, but the lenses. For most folks, if you aren't going to take advantage of the interchangable lenses (again, which is where most of the cost is; good glass is expensive!), then you might consider saving money and getting one of the "almost SLRs" from Nikon (CoolPix P80 or P90), Canon (Powershot SX series), or Sony (Alpha series). While they have a fixed lens, they are versitile enough for the kind of photos that most "regular" folks take, have quite good quality, but cost less than an SLR with a cheap kit lens.

If you DO want an SLR, then a Nikon or Canon is where you should focus. Once you adopt a brand, you'll almost certainly stick to that brand of lens, so that's the bigger consideration, really. The lenses can last 20 years, while you might replace the camera body 3-4 times over that period as the features increase. Again, the most important thing with SLRs is spending the money on good lenses, which are much more important than the body.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

Canon or Nikon for DSLRs, Canon for P&S and smaller cameras. 

There really is no need to look anywhere else IMO. I dont particularly like Nikon's P&S cameras (lots of bad luck throughout my family with many different models that were solved by going Canon). For DSLRs though Nikon and Canon are head to head and very similar. Any SLR is going to give you great pictures (my first Digital Rebel SLR that is from long ago still took better pictures than most of the best P&S models today). There is a place for P&S though, and for example many in my family use them, love them, and get awesome results. The Canon SD line is particularly nice for all around P&S cameras.

Personally I would recommend you look at the Canon G9 or G10. Great mix between a more portable camera and SLR features. Capable of great results too.


----------



## Jason Nipp (Jun 10, 2004)

IIP said:


> ..then you might consider saving money and getting one of the "almost SLRs" from Nikon (CoolPix P80 or P90), Canon (Powershot SX series), or Sony (Alpha series). While they have a fixed lens, they are versitile enough for the kind of photos that most "regular" folks take, have quite good quality, but cost less than an SLR with a cheap kit lens.


I tried the Powershot SX10 today and the quality was not acceptable. I have yet to try the P90.

I'm bidding on a D80 Nikon on ebay, doubt I'll get it in my budget however.


----------



## Cholly (Mar 22, 2004)

Jason -- I have a Nikon D40x which I like a lot. It has been succeded by the D60, which is a very good SLR. Available now from Best Buy for $569. It's a 10 megapixel camera with a 18-55 mm. lens with image stabilization. Check www.steves-digicams.com for reviews on it and other cameras. Steve's is a good site with thorough reviews.

His review on the D60: http://www.steves-digicams.com/2008_reviews/nikon_d60.html


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

If you're ruling out DSLR then I'd recommend Lumix. In your budget you can get this:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0807/08072102panasoniclx3.asp


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

Jason... I am on my 4rd generation of digital cameras. My first was a Nikon CP-990. I then graduated to my first digital SLR, a Canon Digital Rebel. Next I moved up to the Canon XT and then my current camera, the Canon XTi. The newest Canon XSi has image stablization built in. I would go for it today if I were looking. Here's my picture site where, if you click on a picture, you will be able to see what camera was used (on most, but not all pix). http://www.pbase.com/rking401/root&page=all I agree on all the photo sites that others have posted. Take a look around and you will fully educate yourself.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Richard King said:


> Jason... I am on my 4rd generation of digital cameras. My first was a Nikon CP-990. I then graduated to my first digital SLR, a Canon Digital Rebel. Next I moved up to the Canon XT and then my current camera, the Canon XTi. The newest Canon XSi has image stablization built in. I would go for it today if I were looking. Here's my picture site where, if you click on a picture, you will be able to see what camera was used (on most, but not all pix). http://www.pbase.com/rking401/root&page=all I agree on all the photo sites that others have posted. Take a look around and you will fully educate yourself.


Same camera here. I'd definitely recommend the next-Gen in the Rebel series (XSi) if you go DSLR.


----------



## Rob-NovA (Jan 10, 2008)

Jason, I'm a big fan of the Four Thirds cameras made by Olympus and Panasonic. They're dSLRs, but a bit smaller in size than their cousins at Canon or Nikon. If you're looking for a camera today, there are some great deals on the Olympus E-510/520 series (reviews here and here). They tend to come with a 2 lens kit and IMHO, their kit glass is the best out there. One of really great features of the Olympus cameras is that image stabilization is onboard the camera, so you get the benefit of IS with any lens. If you still have some of your old OM glass, you could also use them here (with an adapter). If you can wait a few months, the E-620 (preview here) is coming out and with kit lenses should be in the upper range of your price point. The reviews out now are raving about this camera.

The Micro Four Thirds is another area to look at. It's being positioned as the in-between the compact cameras and full-fledged dSLRs. The Lumix G1 (review here) is a great little camera. The upcoming GH1 is also getting a lot of buzz.


----------



## funhouse69 (Mar 26, 2007)

First of all Point and Shoot Cameras are very convienient and produce more than acceptable results for most people. With that said if you are looking for the most flexibility and the best results possible then you really do want to go with a DSLR. 

Although I am a Die Hard Canon Fan I will admit that going with either Canon or Nikon in the DSLR Department is the best bet. I personally think that Canon has more lenses and accessories to choose from but again you can't go wrong with Nikon either. 

I am strictly a hobby photographer and believe that awesome results can be achieved from even the lowest cost DSLR. I started with Canon's original Digital Rebel many years ago then went to their 30D and now have a 40D with plans to upgrade to a full frame body in the near future. 

So this all comes down to what you are looking for. If you really want something that you can point and shoot then stick with a higher-end Point and Shoot if you are willing to put a little more effort in to the process and want more options like more lenses and external flashes then DSLR is the only way to go.

I've been doing this for a while and enjoy helping others when it comes to photography so hopefully this helps, if I missed anything let me know.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

If your looking for a good deal on an slr... Check cost co.. They usually have full packages, with memory cards, cases, everything for less than the price a body and basic lenses usually costs..


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

I like my D50.. nice thing is it fires instantly.. Taking pics of grandkids is hard when you have a 1sec+ delay between button press and shot.. That was my #1 reason for getting it.. #2 is it can take multiple shots very quick too.. #3 is the optional flash unit..

Wife has a cheap camera that is easier to carry but the delay sucks..


----------



## Jason Nipp (Jun 10, 2004)

Thank you all for your advice, keep it coming if you have more.

I did not get the winning bid on the D80... but I like how it has an 11 point AF. The D60 only has a 7 point.

The more AF help for me the better I think from what I am reading.


----------



## Cholly (Mar 22, 2004)

Jason: I'm curious to know why you feel it's necessary to have so many AF points. If it's that important to you, you'll probably have to go with a more expensive SLR.
I just checked on costco.com -- They have a Nikon D60 kit with 18-55 mm VR and 55-200 mm VR lens, plus GB SD card for $699.95 through 4/18. I'll be stopping at the local Costco store this afternoon and check the price there. Sam's Club has the D60 with just the 18-55 mm lens for $539.95


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

First off... I concur with the the going with Nikon or Canon if you go Digital SLR. Whenever I am asked what brands to go with, my answer is always stick with folks who have a long history of making cameras dating back to Film days. dpreview is your friend and I would suggest spending some time there. 

I personally have a Rebel XT (Few revs back) and have taken over 10K pics with it. A few years back I went with a the dSLR like all in one cameras and have to say that was a night and day experience for me. One thing a dSLR brings is a fast focus to shoot time. With kids this can be very important to get the shot you are wanting to get. 

As for blurry and AutoFocus. Blurry can be a result of shake but also can be a result of not understanding your camera and trying to get it to do something it can't. Example in point, my wife took out our dSLR to my sons game it it was dusk. She had it set to the green square and tried to shoot the kids running around. All the pictures turned out blurry. A few weeks later ("Around the same time"), I took some shots. Well I don't shoot green square and upped the ISO, set my speed to 640 of a second, zoomed out to where I was not underexposing and got some good shots. Like anything cameras have limitations and knowing the limitations and how to work with them will strongly help to get less blur in your pictures. 

As for AF points, I personally only shoot center AF and adjust and find the massive multi-point systems to be a bit of a gimmick. Same goes with massive Mega-pixel. Having more Mega-pixel helps with cropping but also can add more noise and most people don't crop (I do. ). 

I also would echo that it does depend on a lot of factors. Some people don't like carrying camera equipment and like lightweight. If this is huge then dSLRs are not the way to go but you do give up a lot of flexibility and I don't think P&S can match in terms of picture quality. 

I personally like Canon and have been a Canon guy for a long time. Nikon is also well respected and has a lot of fans. Can't go wrong with either of those choices in the dSLR or point and shoot area. Also heard some good things on the Lumax models. 

As someone suggested.. DPreview is really good for evaluations and I would highly recommend spending some time in the forums there.


----------



## Cholly (Mar 22, 2004)

Ron raises a few good points here, I also primarily use center weighted AF. As to blur, if you take the time to understand your camera and its features, you'll find you can avoid it by making some tradeoffs, such as using shutter preferred operation with higher ISO speed, recognizing that the results might be a bit grainy. I usually shoot at ISO 200 and get excellent results with 8 by 10 prints. I purchased my Nikon D40x kit at Costco. The lenses that came with it do not have image stabilization, but so far, I haven't had any real problems with shake. If I have the opportunity to use a tripod when shooting, shake will be a nonissue. I purchased a Nikon SB-400 speedlight and a wireless remote for my camera through Amazon and a UV filter and tripod at Best Buy. I strongly urge the use of a UV filter, since it also serves to protect your lens.
The D40x and the D60 are lightweight DSLR's, but when I want to use something for quick shooting, where I don't plan on really serious photography, I use my Kodak D712, a 7 megapixel 10:1 zoom point and shoot camera, which performs quite nicely.
The one thing the D60 and most other Nikon cameras lack is "true view" on the LCD. This is largely a nonissue though, since LCD's tend to wash out in bright light.
Final thought, that no one has mentioned here. Wherever you buy your camera, make certain it has a USA warranty. Many online and B&M shops sell gray market versions which don't carry USA warranties.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Cholly said:


> Final thought, that no one has mentioned here. Wherever you buy your camera, make certain it has a USA warranty. Many online and B&M shops sell gray market versions which don't carry USA warranties.


Good point, I'm glad you mentioned that. eBay is a known grey-market haven, too. Feedback scores can be high but that's usually based on getting the thing out of the box, pressing a few buttons, and then entering a positive feedback score.

I usually stick with bhphoto.com, adorama.com, or amazon.com for my photography equipment. B&H has always given me great service and their shipping is quick (due in no small part to my proximity to their NY warehouse, I'm sure).


----------



## elaclair (Jun 18, 2004)

tcusta00 said:


> I usually stick with bhphoto.com, adorama.com, or amazon.com for my photography equipment. B&H has always given me great service and their shipping is quick (due in no small part to my proximity to their NY warehouse, I'm sure).


I'll second that on B&H. I've dealt with them many times over the years and have always found them to be reliable and quick (even to SoCal which is about as far away from them as you can get). They may not always have the best price, but it will be close, and in my mind, their great customer service is worth the slight premium on price.

As for which camera, I'll pretty much echo everyone else and say either Canon or Nikon (I'm a Canon-ite myself..have a 5D, 10D, and SD1000 P&S on the digital side, and an A1 and an Elan II on the film side). They've all taken some good use/abuse without a hitch.


----------



## Greg Alsobrook (Apr 2, 2007)

I've had great experiences with B&H also.


----------



## Jason Nipp (Jun 10, 2004)

Thanks everyone for the great feedback and assistance.

I spent 2 hours today playing with a D60 and XSi.

And apologies to the Canon-ites... but I liked the feel and the images I took with the D60 over those I took with the XSi.

Only drawback so far is that there appears to be a back order issue with the 55-200mm Nikkor VR lens. All the stores in my area are on back order.


I would really love that 18-300mm lens.... but $700.... Na.... can't do it....


----------



## barryb (Aug 27, 2007)

http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/14/nikon-d5000-articulates-its-way-into-reality/


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

Jason Nipp said:


> Thanks everyone for the great feedback and assistance.
> 
> I spent 2 hours today playing with a D60 and XSi.
> 
> ...


Different strokes for different folks 

It is all what you are comfortable with, no shame in picking one or the other!


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

> I liked the feel and the images I took with the D60 over those I took with the XSi.


I feel highly insulted.  Congrats on the purchase. I'm sure you will enjoy for many years.


----------



## Jason Nipp (Jun 10, 2004)

A friend helped me get into consumer reports online. And they actually did rate the XSi 6 points better than the D60, and gave it higher marks on ease of use.

Well ok, but I think every review is done from perceived value anyhow. I like the placement of the controls on the D60, and it just felt better physically in my hands. We all know control and comfort will lead to better pictures than any amount of color charts.... well at least in my opinion.


----------



## Rob-NovA (Jan 10, 2008)

Jason Nipp said:


> A friend helped me get into consumer reports online. And they actually did rate the XSi 6 points better than the D60, and gave it higher marks on ease of use.
> 
> Well ok, but I think every review is done from perceived value anyhow. I like the placement of the controls on the D60, and it just felt better physically in my hands. We all know control and comfort will lead to better pictures than any amount of color charts.... well at least in my opinion.


Absolutely correct sir. At the end of the day, it's all about taking pictures and if you're not comfortable with the camera, you're not going to shoot. One can get into an almost endless comparison of systems and lenses and minutia and there are measurable differences but if the best ranked camera doesn't "feel" right to you, it's another piece of gadgetry tossed to the side. Here's to many happy hours taking pictures!


----------



## Cholly (Mar 22, 2004)

Jason- Sorry I didn't get back to you yesterday afternoon about Costco in-store availability of the D60. I didn't get there until last night and discovered they only have the D90 in our store. Guess the deal was online only.
I'd really like to have a 55-200 VR lens for my D40x. Can't justify a second long lens of the same range, tho.

Congrats on your purchase of the D60. I know you'll enjoy it. I have to agree with you about being comfortable with the feel of a camera.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

Congrats Jason.. We will have another technology to throw digs at each other other. I am sure you will be happy with the results. Both companies make some good stuff.


----------



## Jason Nipp (Jun 10, 2004)

Well I was supposed to pick it up today but the shipment never arrived. I was told, and I verified it though another dealer, and Bestbuy, that Nikon has become very slow on deliveries, and since the D60 is being replaced it has gotten worse. Perhaps I should wait for the D5000.

Not that it matters since I found out today that my division at my company is... well... Not sure I'll have a job in the near future. So perhaps the backorder issues were a sign to save my money.


----------



## Jason Nipp (Jun 10, 2004)

Well they called me today and said all lenses were received, so I picked up my reserved D60 and lenses. I was thinking to not pick it up cause I know I will be unemployed towards the end of the year, but hey, nay as well as I won't be able to later.

Here is my first shot, nothing special and a little blurry.

I haven't even read the book yet so I am expecting the quality to improve.


----------



## Jason Nipp (Jun 10, 2004)

Still playing around with ISO modes etc.

Still not spectacular. Hey camera nuts.... about about some settings advice for a camera dummy.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Simple answer: In that environment try putting it in P mode... turn flash off... Higher ISO (400 or 800 or even higher if you got it) and set your White Balance to fluorescent. You should get a nice result without that nasty flash glare. I hate using my flash.

Oh, and congrats on the new toy. Have fun with it!!


----------



## Jason Nipp (Jun 10, 2004)

Was in P-Mode. I tried 800 and 1600 ISO.

Not brave enough to play with white balance yet.


----------



## Jason Nipp (Jun 10, 2004)

Better Maybe? Thoughts?

I used P-Mode on the Animal pics, Landscape on the plants... ISO Auto, AP-Auto, Shutter -Auto


----------



## Greg Alsobrook (Apr 2, 2007)

My suggestion... Don't mess with any settings at first...

1. Start off in fully automatic
2. Move to the creative zones when a bit more comfortable
3. Manually start adjusting settings

And I also highly recommend picking up something such asthis.

Come on tcusta... You should know this stuff!


----------



## Jason Nipp (Jun 10, 2004)

I got the Cliff-notes version of the Guide Greg.... On DVD. 

Haven't sat down to watch it yet though. Having too much fun filling up the 16gb SDHC card. :grin:


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

Isn't a new toy fantastic. I am sure you will have tons of fun for quite some time playing with it. Keep working at it. I still do most of my shooting in full auto mode.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Greg Alsobrook said:


> My suggestion... Don't mess with any settings at first...
> 
> 1. Start off in fully automatic
> 2. Move to the creative zones when a bit more comfortable
> ...


Good book 

Can't adjust many (if any) settings in full auto mode on most cameras, which is why I recommended P... Still fairly automatic but lets you control ISO and WB.


----------



## Rob-NovA (Jan 10, 2008)

When I got started, I found Scott Kelby's _Digital Photography_ series a big help (Amazon link here). I also took a intro to photography class at my local art school. I've learned an amazing amount in a fairly short time (I've only been really serious at this for the last 18 months or so!). The class forced us to shoot fully manual and that was a real eye opener. Made me really appreciate the skills film photographers have and the conditions they had to learn in. We're spoiled with digital! I now shoot mostly aperture priority and change aperture to suit my composition (depth of field). I'll switch to shutter priority if I'm shooting my daughter or sports. I've also heard good reviews of Bryan Peterson'swork.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

You generally dont have to worry about WB too much either if you start shooting in RAW (which I would highly recommend once you get comfortable with the camera a bit more). WB is fully adjustable in PP (post processing) on the computer if you shoot in RAW. RAW is just a straight dump of the sensor data that has the in camera parameters applied as attributes. Unlike with jpg, these attributes can easily be changed in PP on your computer with absolutely no loss in IQ. With jpg, you cannot change the attributes as they are applied directly to the image data by the camera.

The main thing this applies to is WB, but RAW also tends to help get the most out of dynamic range and sharpness.

Best of luck shooting, it is always fun to have a new toy and photography is a fun mix of technical and artistic sides that you can continue to advance in for a long time. I have spent years reading and learning, but I still am not even close to learning it all


----------



## Rob-NovA (Jan 10, 2008)

Grentz said:


> You generally dont have to worry about WB too much either if you start shooting in RAW (which I would highly recommend once you get comfortable with the camera a bit more). WB is fully adjustable in PP (post processing) on the computer if you shoot in RAW. RAW is just a straight dump of the sensor data that has the in camera parameters applied as attributes. Unlike with jpg, these attributes can easily be changed in PP on your computer with absolutely no loss in IQ. With jpg, you cannot change the attributes as they are applied directly to the image data by the camera.
> 
> The main thing this applies to is WB, but RAW also tends to help get the most out of dynamic range and sharpness.
> 
> Best of luck shooting, it is always fun to have a new toy and photography is a fun mix of technical and artistic sides that you can continue to advance in for a long time. I have spent years reading and learning, but I still am not even close to learning it all


Grentz, in general I agree with you, but I'm also a big believer in getting the results you want pretty close in camera. WB is one of those. If you can set that right from the get go, you can avoid a whole lot of post processing later on.

Other thing to note about RAW versus JPEG is that if you've been shooting JPEG for a while, the RAW file will appear to be "flat". Most cameras do a little bit of JPEG processing and will sharpen the image and punch up the color a bit. The details are there in the RAW image, but usually need to be tweaked a bit in a post processor. If you use PhotoShop or Lightroom, it's a pretty easy process.

Oh and RAW files are a LOT bigger than JPEGs, so keep that in mind too. But the OP has a 16GB card and that really won't be an issue.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Rob-NovA said:


> Grentz, in general I agree with you, but I'm also a big believer in getting the results you want pretty close in camera. WB is one of those. If you can set that right from the get go, you can avoid a whole lot of post processing later on.


+1000!!! I hate post-processing.


----------



## Cholly (Mar 22, 2004)

your later pictures are looking good, Jason! Keep experimenting. The more you shoot, the more confident you'll become. I have to confess that I do most of my shooting in Program mode, too. 
BTW, I assume you got Nikon's Picture Project with your camera. It's quite good, and from my point of view, easier to use than Photoshop Elements. (I have a whole bunch of photo processing apps, and bounce from one to the other.)


----------



## CoriBright (May 30, 2002)

I'm all Canon.... Rebel XSi, S51S and an ancient SD400 for when I need something really really small.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

Rob-NovA said:


> Grentz, in general I agree with you, but I'm also a big believer in getting the results you want pretty close in camera. WB is one of those. If you can set that right from the get go, you can avoid a whole lot of post processing later on.


True, I tend to get it close in camera, but still you dont have to be worried about it too much as you can change it later *if* necessary.

To get the most out of your images, you really do have to do some PP and WB usually needs a bit of a tweak as with your camera you will get close, but not always right on. Even the pros have to tweak WB a bit in most cases and it is not that big of a deal. If you use something like the WhiBal it is extremely easy to set WB in PP too. WB is extremely easy to set in a good program, for example in photoshop or lightroom you just use the eye dropper, click on your white or neutral spot in the image, and bam you are done (you can even do a whole set of images at once if they are in similar lighting). You can also use the slider and tweak as necessary or in some programs even use the automatic setting. Takes just a couple of seconds and is frankly one of the easiest things to do in PP.

I dont really see why people get so scared of PP, with a good program it is easy and many times mostly automatic (Lightroom applies my defaults and then I do small tweaks as necessary to the better images that I want to print/show/etc.). It lets you get the most from your pictures and really bring them up to the next level. If you think those great pictures you see in print/galleries/etc. are straight out of the camera you are going to be very disappointed by your results.

But to each their own, we all have our own ways of going about things and that is perfectly fine, part of the joy of photography is finding your work flow. I dont expect everyone to do it the way I do it and at the same time I like to stay open and learn from others workflows


----------



## Jason Nipp (Jun 10, 2004)

Here's a few I had fun with.

They were shot in full auto with a 55-200mm lens. They are resized only, it's not a joke, I really took these today.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

Feeling a little squirrelly today??? I hope you thanked him for his service to his country.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

I would second the Kelby books. I have volumn I and II. Also, Jason I would suggest getting on flickr, smugmug or some other site. It is nice to post pictures and then point to them so that people can see the settings. 

I almost never shoot in creative modes. I normal shoot either Av or Tv depending on what I am shooting or M if I am doing something using the flash. Right now my flash skills still suck. 

I also would suggest listening to the tips from the top floor podcast. keeps those creative juices flowing and I have learned a lot from that show. 

The bottom line though is.. Experiment and shoot a lot of pics.


----------



## Rob-NovA (Jan 10, 2008)

Ron Barry said:


> I would second the Kelby books. I have volumn I and II. Also, Jason I would suggest getting on flickr, smugmug or some other site. It is nice to post pictures and then point to them so that people can see the settings.
> 
> I almost never shoot in creative modes. I normal shoot either Av or Tv depending on what I am shooting or M if I am doing something using the flash. Right now my flash skills still suck.
> 
> ...


I see on Amazon they're listing a Volume 3 for pre-order. Haven't looked to see the ToC though.

One thing I would recommend to anyone who's looking at Flickr, Smugmug, etc. is to learn how to watermark your photos, especially if you're making them available to the world. I've been seeing way too many instances of people lifting photographs and claiming them as their own. You can also look into registering your copyrights as well.

Thanks for the heads up on the podcast. I have a huge list of photography related blogs in my blog reader, need to look at this one too.


----------



## Jason Nipp (Jun 10, 2004)

I took about 3 shots before I even realized the squirrel was there Richard.


----------

