or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What's Your Camera Setup?

post #1 of 14
Thread Starter 

I've been admiring all the awesome shots in the Picture of the Day Thread and it got me curious as to what gear/setup other bears are using.

 

My "good" shots are on a Canon Rebel T3i with a Sigma 18-250 mm f3.5-6.3 lens. I also have a mini aluminum tri-pod that come in handy with that camera.

 

For wet situations and time lapse I use a GoPro Hero2.

 

My throw in the bag cheap point and shoot is a Canon ELPH 100 hs (can't remember the exact number of the model)

 

Also I find the iPhone 4s camera to be handy for quick shots and panorama's. I've actually all but abandoned the Point and Shoot in favor of my iPhone for convenience sake. 

 

I generally use Photoshop CS5 for image manipulation. 

post #2 of 14

I shoot the Pentax K5 because it is weatherproof at less than $1,000 using the same SONY sensor as NIKON, SONY, etc. The image stabilization is inside the camera, which is a bonus since IS lenses tend to test worse than the non-IS versions. The downside to a serious amateur shooting Pentax is that there are more lens choices for Nikon and Cannon.

 

Sports and long stage lens: Pentax SMC-DA* 60-250mm f/4 ED [IF] SDM.  Sharp wide open and weatherproof (it is a D*).  There is a soccer mom shooting a BIGMA on my son's team, and this lens easily outperforms it despite the lack of reach.  When shooting Little League pitchers you can often times read the writing on the ball depending upon the depth of field, which is narrow wide open.   I wish I also had a 300mm or 400mm  f/2.8, but this is so sharp why should an amateur bother?

 

All around lens: Tamron AF 17-50mm f/2.8 SP XR Di II LD Aspherical [IF].   I took a group shot of 72 kids on stage who were acting in a school play at f/4, and everyone was sharp in the 12" x 18" cast photos.  Everyone wants a 17-500mm lens (LOL), but if you want corner sharp photos this is highly recommended by me.

 

Cheap portrait lens:  Pentax M 50mm f1.7.  This is an old "normal" manual lens I picked up for $40 on ebay that is fair at f/1.7 but very sharp at 2.8 on up.  A steal among the old manual lenses. The old 50mm full frame manual lenses are 75mm equivalents, making them cheap substitutes for a portrait lens.  They can be had for a fraction of the newer (automatic) $400+  70mm to 100mm lenses .

 

Portrait and stage photo lens: Pentax SMC-FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited .  I rented this at Borrow Lenses (www.borrowlenses.com) to shoot portraits and stage shots of 70+ kids in a school play, and it lived up to the hype (raised 2x more $ for the school than anyone before me).  I definitely need a dedicated portrait and stage lens for all the volunteer stuff I'm doing, but can't find this lightweight 77mm for a good price.  I am looking at the Sigma AF 70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro as an alternative because it is much more versatile being a macro, just as sharp and less money although slower and much heavier.  Both are full frame lenses, which is a plus.  If only I had more money...

 

Fisheye: Samyang (Bower, Vivitar, etc.) 14mm f/3.5  .  This is a manual lens sold under several names, relatively cheap and loads of fun.  The depth of field is so great that I don't even mess with using Live View most of the time.  I can't believe I lived so long without a fisheye!

 

Pocket Cameras: I recently experimented with the Pentax Q (IQ not great due to the tiny sensor), and borrowed the Fuji X100 (outstanding performance but out of my price range for now). My wife has an older Cannon that works fine, so that is what I use.  I find the iPhone sucks for indoor shots and flash, but is surprising OK for some on-snow shots with post processing.  It is better than nothing.

 

Software: Mostly Lightroom & occasionally Photomatix Pro (for HDR).  If you don't want to mess with ND filters or a tripod and are only a couple stops off in either direction, shoot RAW and let Photomatix do the rest (or make the creative HDR stuff).  Last night I fixed a photo from a hike last week to make a poster for my son's room, and Photomatix made a noticeable difference.

post #3 of 14

I shoot with a d7000 (nikon)...

 

There's 3 lenses that see any use these days.

 

Tokina 11mm-16mm 2.8 usually lives on my camera.  UWA, a short range zoom that acts like a prime lens.  Sharp.  Nighttime lights have a little more flair than I like, but for the most part I've moved through that hipster stage of shooting...

 

 

 

 

The only real zoom I use any more is the Nikon 16mm-85mm.  Most of my filters are sized to fit this guy.  I like it very much.  I would rather have a 24-70 2.8 though.

 

 

 

 

and my new favorite, the Nikon 85mm 1.8.  Love the compression that shortens the DOF while stopping down to 2.2+ and the backgrounds become huge...

 

 

 

 

Usually the 11-16 is on the camera in a Digital Holster case.  I have a lens case that attaches to the bag and the 85mm is the one that typically rides shotgun.  2 unique and totally opposite looks.

post #4 of 14

Canon 60d with 24-105 F4L for almost everything + 85mm F1.8 for portraits

post #5 of 14

Splitter, why the 2.8 on a UWA?  I'd think you'd stop it down quite a bit for the landscape shots, no?

 

I shoot with a Canon 7D as my primary body, and a Rebel XS as my secondary (but only if I'm doing an event, otherwise it stays at home).

 

I'm currently lacking a UWA (my eye is on the Canon 10-22) and Fisheye, but those would be for my own "fun" lenses.  The lenses that get the most love in my bag are the Canon 17-55mm 2.8 IS and the 70-200 F4 L.  Those two cover 90% of any event shots or walkaround/travel shots I do.  I don't really need IS on the telephoto because I'm either outdoors with plenty of light or shooting slower stuff.  Besides, the sublime 70-200 2.8 II IS just wasn't in the budget. I also have the Canon 50mm 1.8 for really low light or exclusively portrait type stuff that gives about an 85mm equivalent on the 7D body.  But it's not as versatile so it typically stays in the bag unless a specific setting requires it (although it's an outstanding value lens for the price).  My backup lenses are the 18-55mm kit lens and a 55-250mm just in case my primaries go down at an event.  If I know I can't get close to the action at a sporting event then I'll rent either a 100-400mm 3.5-5.6 or a 400mm 4 depending on the situation.  Gives an effective 640mm on the 7D, which then also allows for tight crops without losing resolution.

 

My post workflow is almost always done in Lightroom, though I will use Photoshop for advanced editing/cloning/etc.  DxO gets some love for distortion correction on the wide angle stuff beforehand, and Portrait Professional (and seldom Portrait+) sees occasional use if I need to adjust/manipulate a shot which was taken in a non-controlled setting (ie-not posed) and couldn't be re-shot in the field.

 

Rotate/bounce flash is a must for events, and circular polarizer and variable neutral density filters get some use for the outdoor slower action stuff like water landscapes.

post #6 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunnerbob View Post

Splitter, why the 2.8 on a UWA?  I'd think you'd stop it down quite a bit for the landscape shots, no?

 

 

Usually I shoot landscapes at f/7 or higher (f number); I do like the ability to shrink down the depth of field if I want to highlight a foreground object.

 

But I often use it as a candid lens.  Shooting wide (open) is nice then.  Typically it should be a little sharper when stopping down to 3.5-4.5 and still a relatively bokeh'd background

 

f/4.5

 

 

 

 

f/3.5

 

 

 

 

f/2.8

 

post #7 of 14
Skiing, Canon Powershot 990IS
Everything else, Panasonic Lumix DMC FZ200
Paintshop Pro X6 - 64 bit and various plug ins

Years ago when I was using film I had a suitcase full of lenses. Nowadays, money and convenience trump everything.
post #8 of 14
Skiing: Sony RX100 and Contour Roam2. Most of the days it's just Contour and an iPhone, but rx100 is surprisingly great on snow and can do seriois burst shooting.

Other times: Fuji XPro1 and two prime lenses.
I sold off my full frame Canon DSLR system, just was not using it enough after I got into mirrorless.
post #9 of 14

I should mention that I also have a Contour Roam for POV stuff and a Canon Powershot (mostly for the wife's shutterbug tendencies).  Generally all my gear stays at home on ski trips.  iPhone and Canon Powershot do the trick for the most part.  Depends what I wanna do, really.  If I'm out skiing and just shooting secondary, the gear stays light.  If I'm out shooting and skiing is secondary (should it ever be?!?!) then DSLR and a couple lenses come along.  POV camera always makes an appearance when skiing for fun with family.

 

Splitter, I see what you're saying about for bokeh'd candids. That setup makes sense if you're doing lots of UWA landscapes, and you can stop down as needed. I find my 17-55 /2.8 is capable for most my needs....versatile and can do the candids at 2.8, but stop down for landscapes as well.  It's quite sharp (not as nice as a prime or L glass), with just a bit of flare and fringing in high contrast situations, but solid for what I paid.  I'd still like to scoop a Canon 10-22, particularly for architecture and such but I bought new skis so the lens has to wait LOL.

 

BTW, cute kid.  Nice smile, very photogenic.  Hopefully looks more like mom?  biggrin.gif

post #10 of 14

Nikon D7000 with 18-105 kit lens and 70-300 for reach. I still want a wide angle and a macro.

 

I carry it all in a Lowepro 102 sling bag, which is small and easy to grab, but it won't hold the camera with the 70-300 mounted. I can, however, wear it and access it while sea kayaking. No eskimo rolls, though! (Yes, I can do a roll, but not with a camera.)

 

If I don't want to carry the DSLR, I have a waterproof Panasonic P&S, which, unlike a phone, has a true optical zoom and can be used underwater or in a downpour.

 

Nikon with 70-300:

 

1000

 

1000

 

 

Pansonic P&S:

 

post #11 of 14

Nice wildlife jhcooley, beautiful!

 

You know, some of the P&S (and particularly the new mirrorless, which will only get better) REALLY do a good job for decent travel shots, particularly out on the slopes.  For the money shots, likely not, but for documenting memories, family pics, and just plain 'ol fun shots they do just fine.  Fit in a chest pocket, and you're good to go.  Can't complain.

post #12 of 14
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunnerbob View Post

Nice wildlife jhcooley, beautiful!

 

You know, some of the P&S (and particularly the new mirrorless, which will only get better) REALLY do a good job for decent travel shots, particularly out on the slopes.  For the money shots, likely not, but for documenting memories, family pics, and just plain 'ol fun shots they do just fine.  Fit in a chest pocket, and you're good to go.  Can't complain.

 

My dad (a professional photographer) just picked up one of Canon's new mirrorless cameras that you can attach all their lenses to as a quick use camera that is versatile. Much easier to haul that around with a short lens than the 1D for playing around. Although he had a 400mm lens on what is basically a P&S the one time I played with it and that almost looked comical. 

post #13 of 14

Mirroless MIGHT be the future, but it isn't there yet compared to DSLR.  It is coming along nicely though, and I do relish the thought of using my good glass on what is essentially a P&S size with the same size crop sensor as my 7D.  Although......big lens, tiny body doesn't seem to be terribly advantageous.  If I want small, then I'll go small entirely.  If they can somehow improve the digital zoom then mirrorless could be an excellent compromise.  But digital zoom simply can't overcome physics in order to match optical zoom.

post #14 of 14
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunnerbob View Post

Mirroless MIGHT be the future, but it isn't there yet compared to DSLR.  It is coming along nicely though, and I do relish the thought of using my good glass on what is essentially a P&S size with the same size crop sensor as my 7D.  Although......big lens, tiny body doesn't seem to be terribly advantageous.  If I want small, then I'll go small entirely.  If they can somehow improve the digital zoom then mirrorless could be an excellent compromise.  But digital zoom simply can't overcome physics in order to match optical zoom.

 

No definitely not. He just keeps it in the car as an "always there" camera. I asked him about it after posting earlier and he likes it so far, but basically said the same as you. It's nice to have around, but usually he is using the small kit lens with it and obviously no where near the customization ability that he utilizes with his 1D's. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav: