Really neat pictures you have taken.
For Christmas this year I got from a wife a Lumix Z28 camera. It's a SLR style (note not an SLR) camera with a 18x optical zoom and wide angle lens as standard.
Well today I thought I'd experiment. Here is a picture of the moon taken with it using the full 18x zoom plus a little of its digital zoom capability (only a bit mind). Note that my camera is as it is out of the box and has had no modifications or attachments. Not bad for a £200 camera eh??
Note that this image is reduced in size due to FlickR uploading. The real one is a massive 10.1 mega pixels and has a little more detail.
What neat pictures have you taken yourselves?
Well today I thought I'd experiment. Here is a picture of the moon taken with it using the full 18x zoom plus a little of its digital zoom capability (only a bit mind). Note that my camera is as it is out of the box and has had no modifications or attachments. Not bad for a £200 camera eh??
Note that this image is reduced in size due to FlickR uploading. The real one is a massive 10.1 mega pixels and has a little more detail.
What neat pictures have you taken yourselves?
Post edited by Scottie_uk on
Calling all ASCII Art Architects Visit the WOS Wall of Text and contribute: https://www.yourworldoftext.com/wos
Comments
http://www.flickr.com/photos/starglider/
I use now a Nikon D40 DSLR camera, and have a makeshift studio at my flat.
Let me know what you think.
Nice picture by the way :D
Looks like you have had quite a bit of fun with your camera. :p
A night shot of the part of Pune where I live taken from the top of a hill.
Chinese fishing nets in Cochin, India. I'm happy with this one because it was taken in low light with the iPhone's pretty terrible camera.
Lightning seen from the balcony of my previous flat in Pune.
A tea plantation in Kerala. Reminds me of the Tellytubbies.
Waterfall in Kerala. You can walk behind it.
Sunset on the Lizard, Cornwall.
Crooked trees in the Himalayas.
My daughter on a horse with the sun setting on the Arabian Sea. This one's from a couple of years ago, so is probably taken with an Ixus 3.
And since we've had a nice picture of the moon, here are a couple more astronomical photos. They're big, and need to be to see everything, so I'll just post links.
Venus, Moon, Mercury and Jupiter. The last two are hard to spot. They're below the Moon, just about where the sky starts to turn pink.
Venus, Jupiter and Mercury (Earth too!). Venus is obvious. Jupiter isn't too hard to find - it's above the tree at the bottom of the hill. Mercury is hard to see - it's between Jupiter and the tree.
It was taken at sunrise during the summer, so probably about 6am or so. Below you can just see the Bolivar Peninsula on the left, just to the east of Galveston - the tip of which you can see below the wheel. Mostly what you see the sun rising over is the Gulf of Mexico.
I know that up until a few years ago, most professional photographers wouldn't touch a digital camera, but I think that's changed now?
Of course, digital cameras have an LCD so you can see what really is coming through the lens, however, the LCD is low resolution, and not suitable for things like manual focusing. That's why the digital SLR exists - so you have an optical viewfinder so you can see unadulterated what is coming through the lens.
SLR cameras are also characterised by having removable lenses. This means you are not limited to the lens that comes with the camera. Professional photographers want their own glass. The quality of the lens is very important for image quality. This is why a 5MP digital SLR will give you better quality images than a cheap 10MP all-in-one camera, because all the extra pixels in the cheap camera do is to make the optical artifacts of the cheap optics show up more.
The other thing about a digital SLR is they have a much larger sensor than an all in one camera, which means lower noise (I've left the shutter open for over a minute for night shots with the noise reduction turned off on my DSLR, and there was no visible noise on the image. By contrast, a small high megapixel sensor as in found in an inexpensive all in one would just be a speckly field of noise.
As for professionals, it depends what they are doing. Pretty much all the 35mm pros that I know exclusively use digital now - for at least 7 or 8 years, the expensive "pro" digital SLRs have been good enough for all the work the 35mm pros tend to do (newspaper, sports, weddings etc.). Pros who are using other formats (like medium or large format) typically want the characteristics of film, *extremely* high resolution (medium format is something like the equivalent of 200 megapixels on typical films) and the exposure characteristics of film. Large format slow film has to be bordering on the equivalent of multi gigapixels.
When you press the shutter down a mirror inside the camera flips and re-directs the image from the view finder to the film of the camera. Depending on the shutter speed this could me momentary i.e. 2000th of a second or an infinitetly long amount depending on what sutter speed was selected. Most SLR camera's will allow the photographer to open and close the shutter manually as separate events. This allows for some very creative photography in low light conditions such as looking at the stars or taking photo's in almost darkness without using a flash.
SLR camera's usually allow for double (or multiple) exposure (most non SLR's do not) wich also leads to some interesting effects. Which mean's one bit of film can be used to take multiple images and have them layed ontop of each other. Allot of this kind of thing was done on 70's and late 60's record album covers.
Oh yes as Winston says you can change the lenses.
James,
I65 Northbound, between Birmingham and Montgomery Alabama.
Crazy southern god squadders :lol:
Are those lights on top of that sign or claws?? :lol:
Interesting photo, a good guess on the shutter speed et al though.
I know some photographers (maybe all serious ones) who use digital now don't save their images "processed" (i.e. finished, as .jpeg or whatever images), but as unprocessed slabs of data (.raw format, or similar). This is the picture data in it's purest state (if I understand it correctly), exactly as the CCD internal light sensor has recieved the data. That sounds interesting.
When you think about it, photography is an amazing thing, and we take it for granted. I mean, not much more than say four generations ago, photography had yet to be invented, but now for a pitance you can capture image you like for all eternity in near perfect visual quality.
http://alistairsserver.no-ip.org/public/church3.jpg
http://alistairsserver.no-ip.org/public/crypt2.jpg
http://alistairsserver.no-ip.org/public/photos/gallery17/photo03.jpg
http://alistairsserver.no-ip.org/public/photos/gallery17/photo18.jpg
you will probably notice a fondness for high contrast black and white shots :p
Everything You Always Wanted to Know About DSLR * But Were Afraid to Ask:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_single-lens_reflex_camera
You know I think they actually are? The missus said the same thing not long after I was hanging out of her car window with the camera :D
i got a good pic of the twin towers. i can't scan it in though. you'll just have to take my word for it.
images are up on www.flickr.com/photos/bleugh
some of my faves...........
Marysville waterfall in VIC, australia
a local moth down at frankston beach
one of the piers where I live
someone meditating at st kilda beach
someone said this was stirling moss at the 2007 auzzie GP!!
taken with a clapped out nokia ;)
SLOW,
RAMPS
AHEAD
to
LOW
tRAMPS have got no
HEAD
Hehe... That's only about 20 miles away from where I'm sitting right now.
(and about 60 miles away from my house!)
The guy who owns that field is a bit of a rampant god-squadder, and the sign is actually a bit of a local 'tourist attraction' these days.
To go on-topic for a second... I'm by no means a good a photographer as Scottie, but I'll try and post a few shots I've taken over the last couple of years when I get home... I've got a couple of great shots of Amsterdam, as well as some random lucky shots I took last year on holiday.
Andrew
Andrew
I'm not a good photograher. I am a trying photographer.
the term is amature photographer. although don't put that on your CV as people will think you are a sleazy pervert. :grin:
I said trying photgrapher because I am yet to reach the heady heights of amaturism. Amature, implies good photographer but one that does not do it for money.
Didn't say you were *good*... just said I wasn't *as* good ;)
you obviously haven't seen the state of most amature porn on the net.
but you are clearly somthing of an expert. :lol:
He's responsible for about a third of it :D