# Any Photography Hobbiests Here?



## FrugalTrader (Oct 13, 2008)

After receiving an entry-mid level DSLR for Christmas, I have contracted a bit of the photo bug. I mainly use it to take photos of the kids. Any CMFer that photography enthusiasts out there? I recall reading that Sampson is a pro.

I have the:

-Canon T2i 
-18-55mm f3.5-5.6 (stock lens)
-50mm f1.8 (bought on sale at futureshop)

Looking to get the canon 70-300mm f4-5.6 (good value) and perhaps replacing my walk around lens with a Canon 17-55 (expensive) or an equivalent Tamron or Sigma.

What is your setup?


----------



## brad (May 22, 2009)

I was a pretty serious photographer in the 1980s and only gradually getting back into it in the digital age; I currently use a Canon G9, which is really just a glorified point-and-shoot with manual controls but the same tiny sensor. I think my next step up with not be DSLR but rather Micro Four-Thirds, specifically the Panasonic GH-2 or its successor if it's out by the time I'm ready to buy. Maybe with the Voigtlander f/0.95 25 mm Nocton lens if I can ever get my hands on one.

I'm of the persuasion that you don't need an expensive camera to take great photos, but top-of-the-line equipment ensures that your best photos will be pro quality.


----------



## Toronto.gal (Jan 8, 2010)

I don't have any fancy cameras, but I absolutely love photography, always take pictures and have been accused of being worse than a Japanese tourist; I don't mean only taking pictures while on holidays. 

Last camera I bought [last year], was the Samsung Dual View 12.2 mega pixels & 4.6 Optical Zoom, which provide amazing pictures. Prior to that, I had the Sony Cyber-shot, but had problems with it.

Aside from pictures of babies, I particularly enjoy Black & White photography and don't have much appreciation/patience/taste for abstract images. 

Do you have a favourite picture you would like to share? How about starting a photo contest FT? 

*Black & White photography.*


----------



## FrugalTrader (Oct 13, 2008)

If there is enough interest, a photo contest is a great idea! I have to dig something up and upload it.


----------



## brad (May 22, 2009)

Here's one of my favourites:










This girl was painting a car at a craft fair in Portland, Oregon. I need to crop this image a little and touch up a few things, but even like this I love it for the wild colours and the feeling of expression.


----------



## Sampson (Apr 3, 2009)

Not a pro  (I wish)

It's easy to get carried away with gear, that in itself is fun if you are a geek about high quality precision devices.

The 70-300mm lens you list is a nice one, but if you think it's something you will continue doing lots of, buy the better gear now. Consider something like the 70-200mm f/4 or a 70-200mm f/2.8 from Sigma/Tamron/Tokina. You'll be able to focus faster when you need to chase down your kid(s), or when they are in sports, be able to focus in lower light (i.e. in gyms, at kids concerts), and get better subject isolation if you shoot portraits - downside is cost and weight.

Just keep in mind that any lens ($200 vs. a $2000) is about the same quality if stopped down to f/8, so only buy what you need. Sometimes it takes a little while to develop a style also. Nice thing about Canon lenses is that they retain their value quite well.

Just don't let yourself start buying stuff you will upgrade from, if you buy an entry lens, then buy a higher quality lens in 2 years you'll end up with a tonne of lenses costing you way too much.

Consider buying used, from the US. Sites like, bhphoto.com, adorama.com, and keh.com have excellent used gear, it'll save you a tonne of money.

Last piece of advice, switch to Nikon


----------



## CanadianCapitalist (Mar 31, 2009)

BK (before kids) I was into photography. I have a Canon film SLR with some nice lenses. Now, I just point and shoot the kids  

I would like to get back into photography at some point. I've always wanted to do macro photography. It's amazing how cheap photography is these days. Don't have to spend money on film anymore!


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

hey are those art gallery gorgeous photos or what.

brad i wouldn't want to see a centimetre cropped away. That cross-shaped seam of car panels on the left is situated just perfectly. A severe & good-looking geometric counterweight to the vivacious little creature on the right, painting up her storm of colour.

t.gal would the title of this be something like Masochist Cat on Piano Keys. Ouch my back kinks up to even think about it. It's a great photo though, even if you did have to drug the kitty to get her to sleep on a torture rack lol.


----------



## brad (May 22, 2009)

humble_pie said:


> brad i wouldn't want to see a centimetre cropped away.


Thanks -- I was only thinking of cropping just a smidgen from the top to balance the composition a little more. This picture is a good example of how composition is stronger when the subject isn't in the centre, although Toronto.gal's photo demonstrates that this and other rules of photography are simply made to be broken.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

are my eyes fooling me ... or have you already taken a smidgen off the top ?

the thing is, i would have liked it better before. She was smaller, so the contrast was greater. If anything, it made her energy feel even stronger. Part of the success came from the fact that the viewer, as least myself, ws not expecting anything so dynamic.

now she seems to be in a more conventional proportion to the rest of the photograph so the Aha factor is less.

if there really are 2 versions, ie the original from yesterday + this morning, is there any chance you could display them together ...


----------



## brad (May 22, 2009)

humble_pie said:


> are my eyes fooling me ... or have you already taken a smidgen off the top ?


Nope, I have done nothing with the photo! It is exactly as taken, I haven't cropped or done any post-processing, and I might as well leave it that way.


----------



## the-royal-mail (Dec 11, 2009)

Photography hobbyists?

I've been known to take a few photos in my life. 

But I do it not for the "love of photography" but as a means of preserving history. The camera is merely a tool. Our world is changing constantly and as Robin Williams (Sy) said in 'One Hour Photo', these photos are our little stands against the movement of time. For a moment, we've stopped time, he said.

I'm not so concerned about the technical aspects of the input (ie. the camera) at this point. All of that has been dealt with and I refuse to keep upgrading every 2-3 years. I'll replace the camera when it breaks. My bigger concern now is what do with all of these images when I kick the bucket. At this point, I've got 30,000 jpg files all categorized in a meaningful folder structure on an external hard drive (EHD, just another drive letter on my computer, constant/easy access). There's lots of good history documented there, but most of the museums and archives that would have a topical interest are staffed by volunteers with no spare time. I want these photos to end up somewhere where they will be enjoyed and easily accessible. No sense giving stuff to some entity or person, only for it to end up in a dusty storage room with boxes piled on top. Anyone have an answer for this yet?

P.S. There's lots of text here - please don't quote me; just type a normal reply below if responding to me, thanks!


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

great-please-forgive-over-complaining-about-taking-off-smidgens.


----------



## Four Pillars (Apr 5, 2009)

the-royal-mail said:


> My bigger concern now is what do with all of these images when I kick the bucket.


If you are going to do something with the pics, I suggest you do it before you kick the bucket. 



the-royal-mail said:


> I want these photos to end up somewhere where they will be enjoyed and easily accessible.



I guess it depends on what you mean by history - unless you were snapping shots in the middle of some major event - there might not be a lot of interest in your pics.

Pics alone are somewhat useless - they need written context. My suggestion is to set up a website and start putting up "chapters" where you might have a few photos of some event or object and write out the dates and any info you have.

I wouldn't worry about doing all 30,000 pics - just pick one or two of the most important things you want to document and start there.

That kind of project could lead to a book - although books with a lot of photos are far more expensive to produce.



the-royal-mail said:


> P.S. There's lots of text here - please don't quote me; just type a normal reply below if responding to me, thanks!


I had to quote you.


----------



## Toronto.gal (Jan 8, 2010)

humble_pie said:


> t.gal would the title of this be something like Masochist Cat on Piano Keys. Ouch my back kinks up to even think about it. It's a great photo though, even if you did have to drug the kitty to get her to sleep on a torture rack lol.


Lol, I like to google images & that's where the cat came from [not a cat lover mind you, much prefer dogs].

http://www.topcatdj.com/


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

I have done lots with my Olympus SLR but mostly do point and shot. Here is Flash on our fountain on the patio of our penthouse:









This was done with a Canon Elph APS.


----------



## FrugalTrader (Oct 13, 2008)

@sampson, thanks for the tip about the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 OS. It's rated well with reviews and over $1,200 cheaper than the equivalent Canon model! Problem is that the lens is still $1,500 which is hard to imagine paying!


----------



## Sampson (Apr 3, 2009)

I'm telling you FT, in a few years if you keep your photography spirits up, you'll be there, trying to be frugal but also finding excuses to blow money on camera gear.

At this stage of the game, only buy/upgrade if you find that your existing lenses are limiting. Focal length is probably the short coming of your set right now, so forget the "walk around" upgrade for now. If you are keen, then both the Sigma 18-50mm OS and the Tamron 17-50mm are rated very very well.

Sigma also makes a 50-150mm f/2.8 lens, but the Canon 70-200mm f/4 is a fab one.


----------

