|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Derrek
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
 Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 7:35 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Demophobe wrote: |
| Derrek wrote: |
As we've discussed before, about 1 in 100 Nikon users actually needs or has any use for that, Demo. |
Derrek, what's your point? As before, you are only saying that you can't or don't work with this format. You are not even a small sampling of Nikon/Canon users, you are just one guy who takes pictures in the least malleable mode, which is probably fine for many people, yes.
We didn't discuss this before, I showed you some facts about .RAW vs. .JPEG, and these also stand true for Nikon's .NEF format as well, and you agreed/backed off before, as you probably should now.
Some people like options Derrek...and again, discussing these seems to scare you or something.
Why spend $1000 dollars on a camera, then scimp on the software or shoot in .JPEG mode all the time? .JPEG mode is fine for "most people", but then "most people" don't spend that kind of money on that kind of camera, do they? That camera (Nikon 8400) is a "prosumer" camera, meaning it's at the low end of the professional line. This means a couple of things; one, that the folks who buy this camera aren't "most people" who point-and-shoot away in the lowest mode, and two, they have (or probably should have) some vested interest in the photo past the shutter click. Even the greatest photographers in the world realize that the live shot is for framing, composition, etc, but the other components of great pictures comes out in darkroom techniques.
Anyone who is buying this camera does/should know how to develop their digital shots, just as any film photographer at this level has a large role in the darkroom procedure, if not doing it themselves. With film however, the drawbacks of a personal darkroom were many and large. Digital photography has removed many of these obstacles, or at least lessened them to a degree.
So, with the kind of camera that rapier bought, he should be willing to and interested in investing some time in the format that will yield the bast results for him. This is unquestionable. .NEF stomps on .JPEG, as does .RAW.
No, it's not for everyone, you being case in point. Most of your photos I have seen on you site are "auto" shots all the way, save your night shots, which could have been improved had you shot on RAW and done some post-processing.
Anyhow, it's good that you chime in to remind us of what you don't do, and to encourage/remind others that they shouldn't either. |
Rant away, Demo. Again, I repeat what I said -- most users don't have a need for it.
And hey, to the guy who metioned the GIMP software -- thanks. I'm having fun with that! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Demophobe
Joined: 17 May 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 7:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
How on Earth can you speak for "most users"?!? And now Nikon....first, you had the pulse of Canon users, now you have the word on Nikon users....
You are one informed dude.... 
If, in the end, you are right or wrong about your supposed statistics is beside the point.
Why are you saying this? What is your point Derrek? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harpeau
Joined: 01 Feb 2003
Location: Coquitlam, BC
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 8:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wow! looks like I better check out NEF format.
BTW, Ulead's PhotoImpact 10 is awesome and theygive you a free 1 month trial. There are different clubs & boards that will help you learn.
Photoshop CS is amazing!! I found a site that sells a downloadable version for about $100 US.
A good photoshop tutorial can be found here:
http://www.tutorialized.com/login.php
I'm addicted to photo editing!!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the saint
Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Location: not there yet...
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 8:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Harpeau wrote: |
Photoshop CS is amazing!! I found a site that sells a downloadable version for about $100 US. |
... and that would be where... ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rapier
Joined: 16 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 3:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Demophobe wrote: |
How on Earth can you speak for "most users"?!? And now Nikon....first, you had the pulse of Canon users, now you have the word on Nikon users....
You are one informed dude....
If, in the end, you are right or wrong about your supposed statistics is beside the point.
Why are you saying this? What is your point Derrek? |
I got the 8400 to digiscope with, after reading some good reviews that the 8 megapixel picture quality was very good, and that it worked well with scopes. In the relatively new field of digiscoping, Nikon have easily the best rep for among birdwatchers and astronomers. The coolpix 4500 was No.1 for years- I planned on getting one but its been discontinued.
I plan to use my bird/wildlife/landscape shots to contribute information on conservation etc on various websites,
I'll probably be happy with fairly simple software at first but knowing me I'll inevitably want to learn more and keep upgrading towards perfection in all my equipt..
I'm a beginner still learning the basics..I think it'll take me a while to learn how to shoot in manual mode properly-the range of tools available on the 8400 is dizzying. Not sure yet but I probably won't be making prints- perhaps just to build my own website.
The few basic tools on the picture project software (enhance, brightness, sharpness, cropping) have worked wonders but then again I have never seen photoshop in action. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Demophobe
Joined: 17 May 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2005 11:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Anyhow rapier...it's a nice camera. I hope you post some of the fruits of your labour sometime. I am interested in this "digiscope" thing. Keep us posted! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rapier
Joined: 16 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 10, 2005 4:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Demophobe wrote: |
| Anyhow rapier...it's a nice camera. I hope you post some of the fruits of your labour sometime. I am interested in this "digiscope" thing. Keep us posted! |
Thanks- i will. I've ordered an adapter to affix the camera lense tightly to the scope eyepiece. Until then having a few blurring problems due to shakes-cold hands, wind etc, just holding the cam to the scope by hand. About 1 in 15 snaps very clear though. great time around DMZ today photographing the thousands of geese wintering up there:) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Demophobe
Joined: 17 May 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 10, 2005 4:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
rapier....what's the diffference between "digiscoping" and having a telephoto lens?
If I had to guess, I would say that 1. The digiscope is cheaper than an equivalently-powered telephoto lens, and 2. that for the money, the digiscope is more powerful?
Edit (5 minutes later, after re-discovering Google) 
Found this....seems to answer my questions...
http://www.md.ucl.ac.be/peca/test/a.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rapier
Joined: 16 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 10, 2005 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As far as I can tell, a powerful telephoto lens is definitely more maneouvreable and versatile than digiscoping, you can get good shots at any angle- eg: bird flying overhead, etc.
Not sure of the cost of the better telephoto lenses now, but my scope with 20-60x zoom eyepiece was 2.3 M won, the Nikon 8400 900.000w (cheaper than the west I'm told, a special LG import). And then my adapter when it arrives will set me back 150.000.
I'm not sure which combination is superior, but I guess I'm more used to using a scope in the field..plus of course, digital images can be edited, trimmed etc instantly and sent as email attachments the same day- so its very convenient.
The remote control shutter button combined with the adapter should eliminate the slight blurring I'm getting at the moment hopefully...but still, loads of fun with it. I guess digiscoping is pretty much limited to astronomers/ birdwatchers. If I was a private detective it'd come in pretty handy for those long shots of people exchangeing money or whatever, especially coz I can edit the image stored on the camera first, zooming in on tiny details very well.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Demophobe
Joined: 17 May 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 11, 2005 12:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rapier wrote: |
I'm not sure which combination is superior, but I guess I'm more used to using a scope in the field..plus of course, digital images can be edited, trimmed etc instantly and sent as email attachments the same day- so its very convenient. |
I guess you are discounting/forgetting the great digital SLR cameras out there, with all the same lenses as film. My buddy has a Canon EOS 1Ds, a really cool camera with a few really amazing lenses. This includes a stron telephoto lens as well.
Then again, the EOS is about 4 million or something, so the initial investment is higher. Still, there are some cheaper digital SLRs out there with all the same lenses as film. I was just wondering the cost/flexability comparison. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
