Shopping cameras

[M.D. Vaden]

Back in 2004 or 2005 I took pic's for a few sprint car teams and we made those pic's into vinyl cover for the back of there sprint car haulers that covered the whole tail end of them (7 ft by 10 ft +/-) those pic's were taking with Nikon D70s

If I get some free time this week I'll look for them

Late 90's till around 2005 the D70s was one of my back up bodies I carried every were

Just remember glass is were it's at !

I've seen stuff like that before.

It's often designed to be viewed from a slight or moderate distance.

With affordable 10, 16 or 18 megapixel cameras available, I'm not sure why go with a 5 megapixel camera where some photos may stand a chance of enlargement, and other not so much.

Especially when good lens glass can be matched up with a 16 megapixel camera too.

10 megapixels is about the least I'd go with anymore. And that being sort of the median ...

 

[M.D. Vaden]

This was taking with a D70s

Just for comparison, can you pull a 100% crop of that man's, or those women's faces to show some closer detail?

I'm guessing the image is maybe reduced in width.

Recall the lens?

...

 

[M.D. Vaden]

Here's something in the 18 megapixel camera range. With very good glass, a 135mm f/2 ... but the f/2 where this shot was taken, is not it's sharpest either. Anyway, here is the image, but reduced. A full body shot and then some, vs. a closeup. I suspect the Nikon d7000 etc., can easily meet this quality too, with the 16 megapixels.

 

[M.D. Vaden]

Now here are two crops.

One is 100%.

The other is 200% ... in other words, cropped at !00% and then it's width was doubled. Fabric detail still pretty much intact from about 25 to 30 feet away. As is the detail of the hair.

 

[Photog95]

This is the reason why I dont visit photography forums as much anymore. What it the point of this cropping but only for pixle peepers to measurebate. You will never print either of thos crops. The original would look very nice as a 20X30 from a 15 foot veiwing distance which is where you would probably standing when looking at a print that size. I could take that same shot with a 5MP D70 and print it to 20X30 and place them both at 15 feet and you would be hard pressed to find anyone that could pick out any difference in the details in the hair of shorts, not to mention you are not even going to be looking for individual strands of hair anyway.

Nice shot BTW. I love the props and background choice.

 

[M.D. Vaden]

This is the reason why I dont visit photography forums as much anymore. What it the point of this cropping but only for pixle peepers to measurebate. You will never print either of thos crops. The original would look very nice as a 20X30 from a 15 foot veiwing distance which is where you would probably standing when looking at a print that size. I could take that same shot with a 5MP D70 and print it to 20X30 and place them both at 15 feet and you would be hard pressed to find anyone that could pick out any difference in the details in the hair of shorts, not to mention you are not even going to be looking for individual strands of hair anyway.

Nice shot BTW. I love the props and background choice.

Actually, I would print stuff like this and view it from 3 feet away.

There's one Asian model I photographed, and considered printing a 20 x 30 of her standing in a vine maple grove. And me, or others, would be looking at it from not just distant, but from a mere few feet away. Likewise with this photo below. It's got a residence on the right hand side with some pretty cool looking concrete or stone railing that shows up completely in the 20" x 30" print haning right behind me as I type. That's why details seems to matter. Or, put another way, the potential for details. There's going to be some photos I take that will be printed for viewing like 10 feet away. Say, the Portland Yard, Garden and Patio show, where images are on the backdrop of my booth. But I want cameras and lenses that have the options for big photos to be seen both near and far.

 

[M.D. Vaden]

In that last image, the point of focus is actually the rocky area in the middle where the two forks meet. So the railing is out from that. But here's what I enjoy being able to see in poster size prints. Apparently, judging by this 100% crop, the image file could provide a fairly detailed 60" x 40" print.

So 8 to 10 megapixels would probably be a fairly reliable camera for consistent poster size prints ... and I'm guessing 5 or 6 megapixels would be a fairly consistent 11 x 14 and 16 x 20 shooter.

 

[M.D. Vaden]

One other thought about photos, cameras, lenses and details ...

I wouldn't call it pixel-peeping, but this is more related to salvaging a photo. The head shot below is not a head shot. It's cropped from a bigger image. I didn't care for the rest of the image. Sometimes it's nice to have enough detail that a photo can be extracted from a photo.

 

[Steve NW WI]

I do occasionally print out bigger pics for friends. I take a lot of farming pics while field work is going on, my friend has 16x20 or so pics of his combine and 4x4 tractor on the wall in his office, from my old 6MP camera, they looked pretty good blown up.

Most of my pics do, however get shared on the internet (drastically resized), although I do crop quite a bit as well. I also have one of those digital picture frames that I fill with pics from previous years' race trips and set up on the table outside the camper for visitors and friends to look at.

Pretty sure I don't need a 4000gigapixel camera, at least to start. I'm kinda looking at this like buying cars, equipment, etc. I'll get something that'll do the job, and I can upgrade later and still get some of the original investment back when I trade or sell the old stuff.

 

[H 2 H]

One thing about my photography is it happenings in a split second and then it's gone forever nothing staged except trophy shots. I think it would be hard to tell race promoters; team owners and drivers to stop in the middle of a race so I could take a picture of them

That pic I posted earlier was from 2006 ? (it was on the first page of photobucket site) with a backup camera I don't have the time to move settings around or change lenses from different and cameras during races; I carry two to three bodies set up with different lenses. It was also taking with f/3 (plus) lens on a dusty sprint car track with flash and it wasn't ps'ed (at night) if you ever been to a dirt race track you'll know what im talking about :msp_smile:

And that pic did make a national rag :msp_smile:


PS: those D70s were such a bad camera

 

[Photog95]

I hope you dont think that I am trying to pick a fight here. I understand what you are talking about with heavy cropping and details. Most people are not even going to care. The shot above with the river....I spotted that one on your website and fell in love with it. It is an amazing shot as a whole. I would not even consider getting up close to a large print of it to start picking rocks out of a rail. That need to be enjoyed by stepping back and looking at it as a whole from a proper veiwing distance for whatever size print you have. I love it.

Now back to the pixle peeping. It really is fun sometimes. The shot below is a fun example. Somewhere around here on a CD I have the RAW file for this shot. It is really fun to look at it as enlarged as possible before losing details. Somewhere in one of those upstairsa windows there is a clock hanging on the wall and you can actually see what time I took this shot. Kinda cool.

 

[Beefie]

You guys have given Steve a hole head full of info, me as well. The biggest thing that is going to happen is to get Steve to open his wallet:hmm3grin2orange: Keep those awesome outdoor shots coming. The lightning and the Iced up tree are just mind blowing, you guys have the talent to see whats good.


Beefie

 

[Photog95]

This looks like it might be a pretty good buy.
http://lacrosse.craigslist.org/pho/4171043333.html

 

[Steve NW WI]

LaCrosse is a bit of a road trip, but I might give a call if I have some time tomorrow. I haven't really shopped much yet, but I was leaning towards a T3I. It sure looks like I'll have all the overtime I want (or more than I really want) for the next few weeks, might be a camera on the Merry-Christmas-To-Me list.

 

[bubba3228]

Steve I was and still am looking for a decent entry level camera and wanted to do more research as well. I found this forum (http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/n/d/851.jsp) to be helpful with the learning curve. Hope it helps.

Bub