2007 Photo Contest... What camera did you use?

High Desert, NV(Zone 5a)

There has been much talk of picture quality lately. and some have suggested that the winning photos will have been taken with the most expensive cameras.

So, I am curios... Top three or not, what camera did you use? Post a picture you entered (or more) if you like. Do you recommend your camera? Why or why not?

I use a Canon S1 IS, it's about $150 used on eBay. Currently I only use the auto setting, though I would like to get to know more of the camera's functions, and would love to have a better zoom. Taking a real close up is a serious challenge with this camera!

Melissa



Thumbnail by tombaak
South China, ME(Zone 5a)

I use a Kodak Easyshare z740 zoom digital camera. I love everything about it, but still have a lot to learn. Only 2 things I don't like about it, no Macro lens and no changable lens. You can see and read about the specifications here:
http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier.jhtml?pq-path=6551&pq-locale=en_US

Appleton, WI(Zone 5a)

Melissa - I voted for that one - congratulations.

My camera is not overly new - it's a Sony DSC-S75, not sure what it lists for - it's 4-5 years old. It does have some limitations with pixilating in low light and washing out yellows in full sun, but I think that if you take plenty of pics with your camera you can find out where the strengths and weaknesses are.


One of my favorites from this year

Thumbnail by bigcityal
New Hampshire, NH(Zone 5b)

Some of the photos I submitted were taken with a Nikon 6006 using Fuji Velvia slide film (Bryce Canyon in scenic category). Other pictures were taken with my newer digital Nikon D100 (my watergarden in garden landscapes). While some might classify these cameras in the slightly more "expensive" category, I mostly use the automatic mode. And I've seen some pretty stunning photos taken with average cameras.



This message was edited Nov 19, 2007 7:07 PM

Northern California, United States(Zone 9a)

Although I am now using my new SLR Canon XTi, the images I submitted were taken with a Canon Powershot G3, in the Automode.

This message was edited Nov 19, 2007 3:51 PM

Necedah, WI(Zone 4b)

I use a Kodak EasyShare Z612. I just got it this year and am still in love. :)
http://www.amazon.com/Kodak-EasyShare-Z612-Digital-Optical/dp/B000DZHA6O/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1195516855&sr=8-1
It's $150- 210 depending on use and who you buy it from. My photos were all shot on the auto setting, and I have absolutely no artistic skill with a camera. I only photograph to document. I could see someone with talent really getting some nice photos out of this camera. It's easy and very reliable.

Lincoln, United Kingdom(Zone 8a)

I have a Nikon D40X, my son bought it for me and I have only had it since early September. It's the newer, cheaper version made in China and Thailand as they are moving production. The lens is a 55-200mm VR, again a plastic cheaper version but obviously lighter.

Most of the pics I took with this, with the exception of my Daffodil Fortissimo which I used my old Sony DSC V1 compact. I use 'Auto' for many things, for smaller objects I had used the spot focus metering with single area auto focus, also centre-weighted metering with dynamic focus area (allows for movement), depending on the size of the object or insect. These are settings in the digi-vario programmes I used on the 'P' or programme setting which now doesn't work!

Taking a real close up with this camera isn't as easy as you may think, although it has a dedicated Macro setting it is really only useful for the whole area with the kit lens at 18mm, even then can only be shot at a distance of 11" minimum. The 10MP does allow for a lot of expansion though.

I only use the 55-200mm lens now which has VR, vibration reduction, essential with a longer zoom lens on a DSLR if taken hand held, and I don't use tripods with the type of photography I do. You can only take pics from a minimum of 3 feet with this lens! So all my insect pics are from that distance, and the focus spot is very precise, if any closer or further away at times it will go straight through it as if it's not there.

This pic of Salvia Black and Blue had the sun behind me, it was in partial shadow, I had a devil of a job getting it to focus. The dark colour in shadows made the lens shoot straight past to the sunlit foliage behind, but this is what I got with persistence. All I have done is crop a little off, it didn't get a place but it is one of my personal favourites, taken about a week after I started to use the camera.

Thumbnail by wallaby1
Taft, TX(Zone 9a)

I think the photo programs available now are more important than the cameras in making flowers look like "not real flowers". My sister in law took two college courses and promises that the photo programs have more to do with altering original pics than the camera lenses, etc.

Alamogordo, NM(Zone 7b)

I used a Finepix Z5 and I think it was around $200 so it is not an expensive camera. I didn't do any editing with the software that comes with it other than maybe cropping occasionally. I think it takes really good photos and it is more in the skill and art of the photographer than in the camera they are using. This shot was one I entered. It is one of the best I have taken and I feel that it was more because I happened to be outside at sunrise to capture this rose at just the right time. One of these days I have to learn to use the software though! I can see lots of possibilities if I would take the time to learn.

This message was edited Nov 26, 2007 7:07 AM

Thumbnail by cactuspatch
Lincoln, United Kingdom(Zone 8a)

Lovely soft rose cactuspatch, I have one I took with my Sony of Evelyn which has a real sunset glow on it, you are correct, the light which you happen to capture at the right time makes a huge difference. The eye of the photographer is important in framing of the picture.

Gee gessiegail, your post following mine really makes it look like you are accusing me of using a programme to fix my flower, I assure you not, all I have is the basic Picture Project that came with the camera. This I use to crop, alter brightness, and there is sharpening which I rarely use as it leaves a terrible grainy effect, the only time I use it is if it is very dull and it helps to save an otherwise good picture. There is a colour alteration setting but that is never needed (and I never use) as this camera has such good colour capture. You maybe should try using a DSLR to find out for yourself.

This was my other flower pic, and no, I didn't use a thing to alter it, it was taken late in the day with the camera pointing at a light/sky gap through the oak tree behind. The flash went off in the low light and highlighted the flower.

Thumbnail by wallaby1
Taft, TX(Zone 9a)

I don't think it should matter anyway what one does with their pictures whether it is a camera lense or a photo program. I think it is just a matter of preference for the individual as to what looks good to them individually.

I just happen to love pictures that look exactly like what the subject looks like.

Lincoln, United Kingdom(Zone 8a)

The title of this thread was 'What camera did you use'.

Taft, TX(Zone 9a)

Wallaby1, I will make an apology if you need one. Please read the post that she originally made. It includes subject matter relevant to my post.

Phoenix, AZ(Zone 9b)

Gail, the thread title is "What camera did you use?", not "What software program did you use to enhance your photo?"

I have reread Melissa's original post (a couple of times) and see no mention of enhancement techniques. Although threads often wander off topic, this aside that you have started is easy to interpret as though some of our photographers 'cheated' by using enhancement techniques.

Did you post a photo? If not, you have nothing to report with regard to which camera you used and why. You could however, use this thread to help make a decision about what camera to purchase, if you are so inclined.

Personally, I think you owe our community of amatuer photographers an apology for even suggesting they may have cheated by using enhancement techniques. Sometimes Gail, what you see really is what you get. And some talented folks get great results just by pointing and shooting.

Mary [off to pull on that flame retardant suit I have not used in a while.]

Dublin, CA(Zone 9a)

Altering pics with software wasn't allowed in the contest anyway (beyond simple things like cropping) so the vast majority (if not all) the pictures in the contest would have been pretty much straight out of the camera.

As far as cameras--I use an Olympus C700 Ultra Zoom, cost about $300 5 years ago so you could probably pick it up for way less than that now! I like it because of the 10x zoom, that was the main reason I bought it.

Thumbnail by ecrane3
Taft, TX(Zone 9a)

My goodness, everyone seems to have gotten up on the wrong side of the bed this morning. I was the first on Dave's Garden just to mention that it is good thing everyone gets a vote on the best pictures since they are all in the eye of the beholder. And...i did mention 'fancy cameras', but i think I will get back to happier people this morning on DG.

You certainly may have your own thread. By the way, I used a Konica Minolta 5Z camera with all kinds of lenses which I don't use. I probably post more pics on DG than 80% of you on this thread.

I will repeat "no one is cheating nor does it matter"........it is just a matter of what each of us prefers to see in a picture.

Apologies to everyone who thinks they need one.

Dublin, CA(Zone 9a)

gessie, I don't think anyone got up on the wrong side of the bed. Altering photos is a very touchy subject around here--I don't know if you were here last year around the time of the contest but there was a lot of ugliness about a couple pictures that people thought had been overly Photoshopped. Reading your original post, I can see how people might have thought you were implying that people in the contest had modified their pics with software. Hopefully you didn't mean it that way, but words on a page are easy to misinterpret especially when it's a touchy subject like this one.

Taft, TX(Zone 9a)

I didn't even know it was against the rules to modify pics, ecrane. I wasn't here last year at this time. All this time I though people were modifying pics and I didn't seen anything wrong with it nor did I know it was a touchy subject.

I simply was stating that some pics, more than others, either had fancy equipment (like my sister in law's 6,000.00 camera she bought for a safari in Africa) or looked like they were being modified by photo programs. I know nothing except what my preference is in wanting photography to frame in my own home.

My sincere apologies to everyone. I just didn't know that any of these techniques i mentioned were not even allowed..........

High Desert, NV(Zone 5a)

bigcityal,

Thanks, I would like to think the shot is nice because I take great pictures. LOL The truth is I took several shots of that flower on the occasion that photo was taken. The lighting was perfect, the wind was mercifully still, it seemed an easy lovely shot. Out of the 8 or 10 shots or so most weren't in focus at all! That is the weak spot of my camera in my opinion. The other pics weren't centered, looked off etc. but, out off all the shots I did get one good one. LOL I have found with my camera as I've heard others mention, it is usually easier to move farther away and zoom in than take a "close up" from up close.

How many pics did it take to get Akita to look her best? It's a really nice shot! I am curious because I grew Akita the summer of 2006, and found it particularly hard to get a good photo of. Didn't bloom overly well here either...

I use iPhoto which has the everyday brightness, cropping etc. tools. I would however like to get Photoshop. Though not allowed in this contest I really like some of the effects, especially the ones that make a photo look like a line drawing, watercolour etc.

Maybe next year Dave will add an altered category. That would be fun... Blue roses, red iris, faeries in the garden...

Wallaby, I loved your Hidden Promise picture, the twist on the bud is great! I don't recognize the flower though. What is it? I would love to see it open.

SongsofJoy, the Brice Canyon shot was fantastic. What a testament of will to live that pine is!

gessiegail

Quoting:
I simply was stating that some pics, more than others, either had fancy equipment (like my sister in law's 6,000.00 camera she bought for a safari in Africa) or looked like they were being modified by photo programs.
I can really see where people are being rubbed the wrong way by your comments. Things like
Quoting:
I probably post more pics on DG than 80% of you on this thread.
seem sour grapes-ish.

Personally I can't even wrap my head around being able to afford a 6K dollar camera. I took two of the 14 winning photos this year with a camera I bought new almost 4 years ago for about $300. As I stated before it can now be picked up on eBay for about $150. I use the auto setting, though I would love to learn more than just that. A fellow double winner this year (who also uses a Canon Powershot) suggested I read the book. LOL

I think that unfortunately you are overestimating our wealth and underestimating our talent, or drive to take good photos. It is also quite possible as mentioned above that without facial expressions or voice intonation what you are typing is not coming out well at all.

Either way, I am bummed that a thread started about cameras has turned into this.

Quoting:
Either way, I am bummed that a thread started about cameras has turned into this.


That was my exact reaction, too. :(

Alamogordo, NM(Zone 7b)

I didn't take any offense with Gail's suggestion that some photos may have been altered. I have been into photography for decades and have often had friends lament that they spent more on their camera and still don't get the shots I do. It is more a matter of the time I spend playing with my camera, they don't realize that I don't always just step outside and the perfect shot presents itself. One of my best shots happened to be a rose arbor with a rainbow in the background and golden sunlight. It all happened naturally and I was amazed at that shot. The shots I took 2 minutes before and 2 after were very different. But I can see how some who voted may have assumed it looked altered and not voted. Those things happen-amazing light when you least expect it and people making wrong assumptions.

Tombaak, I love hearing your camera was neither new nor expensive and you won in 2 categories! Congratulations!

Murfreesboro, TN(Zone 7a)

cactuspatch, I voted for your photo (I didn't know it was yours at the time, of course ;o)

Congrats to Everyone who participated in the DG contest.
Voting members and photographers!

The camera I have is a Canon PowerShot S3 IS. I got it on sale for 285.00. I love it! I really love the flip and twist LCD
I'm the one who read the instruction book... LOL
I still made many mistakes...I experimented...And then I learned more and more about my camera. I'm one of those
people who learns by making mistakes.

I also enjoy taking photos in the Early morning hours. That is when the lighting is just right!!

(Ronnie), PA(Zone 6b)

Well to get back on the subject I use a Cannon Digital Rebel. It was a gift from my husband and two sons and cost 800.00 two years ago. It has a lot of bells and whistles and I am such an amature and read the book every day!!! I used a macro lens for my shot.

By the way thanks for the votes!! ♥

Thumbnail by luvsgrtdanes
Murfreesboro, TN(Zone 7a)

luvsgreatdanes, I confess I voted for that shot of yours, too - it's nice to put photographers names with all these stunning images!

Northern California, United States(Zone 9a)

I have not commented since the beginning because I didn't want to add fuel and needeed to let the thread go (count to 10 motto thing :-) but I did feel hurt by the implications. As mentioned by tombaak though, "without facial expressions or voice intonation what you are typing is not coming out well at all" was a possibility.
Anyways, to set the record straight in case there was any questions with my images, I do not PhotoShop, don't know how. I simply crop if needed, sometimes set the brightness if it's a bit dull and sharpen if needed because I didn't get that crisp focus the first time. Mine are as I see it through the lens.
That goes for all of my 2900+ PF images if anyone cares to check.

Happy 2008 picture taking you all!!

Northern California, United States(Zone 9a)

GardenGuyKin, and you do an EXCELLENT job which is obvious by your landslide votes in the tree category! I think that has to be the most votes ever for a single image. Don't you love being at the right place at the right time/lighting?!

High Desert, NV(Zone 5a)

cactuspatch, Thanks! I think I owe a lot to persistence and going digital. :) The advent of digital has done wonders for my photography. Not only being able to take 20 shots and deleting the crumby ones, but being able to take a shot, look at it and take another.

And as you mentioned sometimes a shot just presents it's self to you. I love those shots! I took a picture of a Sun Dog one day that looked so fake! It was even taken on film, which I wouldn't have a clue as how to alter, but the picture just looked other worldly.

I am not sure about the rest of you but I also spend a ton of time thinking about the picture, changing angles to get a better shot, waiting for better light on a flower etc.

The picture I took of our winter squash haul was like that. I took a couple of pictures, they looked flat. Because the squash were being cured on a table on the SW side of the house I waited until late in the evening for better light, took another picture. The composition wasn't right. Moved several squash. I could still see some of the glass table through them, put some of the mini pumpkins our daughter had grown for her class in "blank" spots. And ta-da, just like that took a very nice shot. *snort* ;)

If you look close you can see a bit of the glass table, but because of the light direction, the table looks pretty dark.

Thumbnail by tombaak
(Ronnie), PA(Zone 6b)

Thank You Terry!!! ☺

Also forgot to add I would recommend my camera if it is affordable to someone, I waited quite a few birthdays before I got it!! LOL

I think the lenses make a big difference in any shot, whether beginner or not. Sometimes you get one great shot and others it takes many for just the right one!!

I don't think it matters the cost of the camera, practice and patience makes perfect!!

Thank You Sue!!
Blush Blush...
I live very close to where that photo was taken. It's a city park.
I went there three days in a row and on the third day the morning light hit the flowering dogwood just right to make it blaze with color. I also used the vivid color camera setting which canon powershot has in it's camera programing.
I won't even go into how many pics I took of that grouping of trees! LOL

I must admit. Viewing many of you and kells photos inspired me to improve my photo skills!
:)

Alamogordo, NM(Zone 7b)

Thanks Terry! ; ) And congrats CASue on winning. I see so many of your photos on the rose forum that I think you prove that just taking lots of photos is one of the ways to become really good at it. Practice makes perfect. I love seeing your stuff! I actually got Photoshop Elements a couple of years ago. I have used it to organize my photos but haven't taken the time to learn how to use it to alter any of my photos. The software that came with my camera is so quick and easy to brighten, crop or add text. I take so many shots that I usually get some good ones without needing to change them! But I feel a bit guilty that I have that software and don't know how to use it.

And yes, with posts or email you have to read what you type a couple of times because you can be in the best of moods and not mean anything nasty but it may be misunderstood.

Alamogordo, NM(Zone 7b)

Lots of posts all at the same time. I also take lots of photos, think about the shot and take in different lighting situations. My eyesight is failing and after using a Pentax SLR for ages, I finally gave into digital. I really love it. Partly because of being able to delete all the bad ones! And for my vision, it is great to be able to see them on my screen, much better than a printed photo. My dh wants to get me a digital SLR but I don't know if I would do well with it as my vision gets worse.

High Desert, NV(Zone 5a)

There you are Kin, were your ears ringing?

Not just because your mushroom picture was OUSTANDING, and my very favorite! But, because I now feel like a total dork for not thinking of it. I am going to read the book!...





Just as soon as I can find it.

Phoenix, AZ(Zone 9b)

I *loved* that squash picture! and the shrooms too, and......oh I could just go on and on. So many grand pics.

Ring Ring...LOL
Here you go so you don't need to search for it.
http://www.retrevo.com/search/v2/jsp/downloadPage.jsp?doc=aa27ffcb5e45781eea4afd1ae6fa0f93&q=canon+powershot+s1+is

Northern California, United States(Zone 9a)

No no Kin, now I am blushing! I am inspired by your shots! Look how many placed in the finals, and now Dave added the top 5 runner ups! But looking at all those images, I try to take something from each one as inspiration.
Thanks cactuspatch, glad you enjoy them, roses are a renewed interest for me this year, I'm afraid I've gone overboard!

Ok, who thinks this is PhotoShopped ? LOL! It looks exactly like that, I couldn't even buy it, it looked so unreal!

Malope 'Vulcan'

This message was edited Nov 20, 2007 9:58 AM

Thumbnail by Calif_Sue
Murfreesboro, TN(Zone 7a)

Kin, I would have voted for your tree photo if I had seen it - I think that was one of the categories I didn't leave myself enough time to go through and vote.

Really and truly, all the photos this year were winners. It was tough to choose, but sure was fun to look through them!!!! I can't wait to get my 2008 calendar ordered ;o)

Lincoln, United Kingdom(Zone 8a)

I don't think I could have learnt anything about my camera without reading the manual, after having used a point and shoot compact for 2.5 years I was daunted! The compact I thought in the first place was difficult enough, lol, little did I know what was coming!

For starters, you can't see the pic on the monitor to take the picture, only AFTER. You have to go back to that old-fashioned way of looking through the viewfinder, when I first got it in my hands I was in a cold sweat, nearly returned it, I had never used any type of SLR before.

Thankfully the viewdinder magnifies what you are looking at quite well, but I would say you still need good eyesight, I am still blessed with that even though I am slowly falling to bits, lol. There are however attachments to make viewing even more magnified if anyone is considering this.

I decided that I was NOT going to go backwards, the brain cells would have to grow, that they did and I now wouldn't like to use anything else. This camera is a daily attachment to me, I take it with me when I do my first daily rounds in the garden (hung around my neck, it doesn't feel heavy that way), I now pop up the road to a field to see what birds I can find before I return indoors, I can spend at least an hour with my camera before going inside but just now the weather isn't allowing much.

It has given me the incentive to get much needed exercise, something I can do very little of because of a road traffic accident. It has become a continuation of my garden, as have the insects which visit my garden and which I take pics of. My previous camera was the beginning of this extended joy in my life, but had become exhausted and limited in it's capabilities. I feel so lucky to have been given this camera, my life is enriched beyond any expensive holidays or costly but useless 'objects'.

Yes, I agree with your wise words tombaak

" I think that unfortunately you are overestimating our wealth and underestimating our talent, or drive to take good photos."

I hold no grudges, I try to be forgiving, I try to understand where others are coming from, it's not always easy but we can learn.

I just love to see all these wonderful pics coming up again, each and every one is precious to the taker, and a joy to view by others. It's great to hear the stories behind the pics, we who took them know just how lucky we each felt when we go them.

The 'Hidden Promise' is a Lilium (thanks tombaak!), I bought the seed on ebay from the US from someone who saved theirs and their friends own seed. It should be Lilium philippinense, but even though it has the correctly coloured blue thing on the end of the style, as well as the correctly coloured pollen, it has no scent that I can smell, and the red and green striping on the outers doesn't seem right either. The closest I have come across is one sold by rareplants here, L. poilanei, the correct one as they put it and is specific to one small location I think in Vietnam, but it should also have a scent. I bought a bulb last autumn to satisfy my curiosity (it barely made a stem), I grew the seed the prvious year and they flowered last year with one flower. This year the healthiest one was 6 feet tall, a couple of others were shorter with still one flower, it was one of those which I spotted and snapped, and as usual it was as I was passing, camera with me at the ready.

I think I only took two pics, that's the beauty of this camera, although I still take many pics, often over 200 in a session, sometimes twice a day, then as you can imagine there's a lot of work sorting them. I now find though that I end up with several reasonable pics of which I choose the best, whereas with the compact I still took plenty but had fewer keepers.

This is the same flower opened, this one has yellow pollen where the tall one has brown, and as you can see I dabbed pollen on it which I kept from last year off L. gloriosides (that got zapped by this year's dreadful weather), no luck there though! Sorry about the long story!


Thumbnail by wallaby1
High Desert, NV(Zone 5a)

Well, now I have no excuses Kin...

Calif_Sue, that picture of Malope 'Vulcan' is great! Funny how the right light can just make something look even better than it is.

I took this quick pick to show a rose that I had just purchased. Didn't even look at it till I downloaded it hours later. The picture shows such amazing colour it looks like PhotoShop hanky panky.

Unfortunately, thought the picture wasn't altered, it isn't a fair representation of the flower either. In real life the flowers are lovely, but nothing like this. :)

Thumbnail by tombaak
Alamogordo, NM(Zone 7b)

I also carry my camera with me all the time. Part of the reason I got my little digital. My old SLR was getting way to heavy and I had a shoulder injury that made me feel it! Sue, keep overdoing, I am loving it. Tombaak, that is lovely. I know what you mean, that VooDoo rose really looked like that but when I go out to take more shots now they never look that full. Some days I wonder where that bloom came from! I realize reading this that I miss discussing photography, I need to check out that forum. I think I have been hesitant because I don't know all the digital terms and don't have a DSLR. Do you all post there regularly?

Post a Reply to this Thread

Please or sign up to post.
BACK TO TOP