So I am thinking of getting a real entry level camera some sort of DSLR with skookum lenses and all of the real photo stuff.
I generally take pictures of Automotive content, for now just with my consumer level best buy / wal*mart camera.
Here is some recent work..
Yes sorry they are links to the Albums.
'62 Plymouth Valiant V 200 Wagon:
https://www.flickr.com/gp/149826863@N07/j1ub97
'69 Dodge Dart Swinger
https://www.flickr.com/gp/149826863@N07/TtP313
Certainly look here and their various rankings and reviews:
A lot of photography (old style and new) is post processing so you will likely want tools for that (Photoshop being the benchmark).
In reply to aircooled :
Thanks. I will look into those.
My pictures have no editing except for the color chooser / filter on the camera itself.
Personally I would take a look at the mirrorless options instead of a DSLR. I shoot photos and video on the Sony system with my main camera being a Sony A73.
If I had to start fresh with a new system I would look at Canon. I really like how they have added adaptors so you can use older lenses from their DSLR lineup on the new cameras. But I also really like my Sony and would recommend their lineup of cameras.
The biggest thing I think is look up the reviews watch some videos on YouTube find one you think you might like and go to Best Buy and physically hold the cameras. A big issue a lot of people have with Sony stuff is it is on the smaller side and not as ergonomic.
I am not familiar with the other lines of cameras but the "entry" level on Sony would be something like the A6000 or the A6100. I own an A6000 and really like it.
One last suggestion is that if you can only afford one lens buy a 50mm that is my go to lens for shooting static cars.
In reply to ChrisTropea :
Thank you sir, Much appreciated.
I will add the concept (that might not apply to your use / needs): that you first need to take the picture.
The reason I say that, is that if you have a full camera rig setup (camera, lenses, tripod, bag etc) you may, or will, become far less likely to bring it with you places you might take pictures (as opposed to plan on taking pictures).
Like I say, may not apply to your needs, but sometimes, having a very portable camera greatly increases the chance of getting a great shot. For this reason I specifically avoided a camera body system and went with a fixed lens, so I would not be tempted to stock up on stuff I would have to carry around.
In reply to aircooled :
That Makes Sense.. That's kind of what I have now of sorts.. It's a Fixed Lens Consumer Grade Model. I can get reasonably adequate telephoto capabilities from it If I had a tripod.
Maybe I will just hang onto it after I upgrade and see how it goes.
Thank you
On my brothers recommendation, degree in photography, I ended up with a Canon 40D from https://shopgoodwill.com/home. I got the body, two lenses, a bag, two batteries and a charger for something like $40. I wanted something to take to the track but didn't want to spend a bunch of money in case I decided it was too much of a pain.
The camera is old and does not shoot video, but it still shoots faster than a lot of newer cameras and with only two lenses its not much to lug around and according to my brother it is more weather proof than the consumer bodies so being out in the weather is not a big deal.
More Recent Work:
- The '64 dart AKA Grüne Hölle:
- '73 Barracuda:
Tomorrow I am going out to look at a reasonable Nikon D610 - It Will have all the things a proper entry level Full Frame should have like control over the ISO, Shutter Speed. and interchangeable lenses. Currently, I have only a single (4-120mm) lens camera with a lot of presets but limited control over ISO / Shutter / aperture
I woulld think at first with the unlimited settings the photos will get worse before they get better as I need to learn how to use the settings for the shot and situation.
I need to get some sort of tripod as well.
I've got a Pentax DSLR and multiple lenses that you are more than welcome to for a minimal cost.
If you have any interest let me know and I'll post a photo & list of all of the bits.
@Aaron_King Thank you for that Info - Although I could have gotten a very reasonable camera There, I did pick up one locally, But I have bought 3 lenses for it recently off of shopgoodwill for very reasonable cost. Thanks again!
@trumant Thanks you but I do have a camera now - Could possibly be interested in the lenses if they are Nikon / Nikkor F type - I would think pentax uses a different form factor.
Recent work of a Friend's 1976 Honda Civic - Gathering Shots for Bat / GRM Sale:
as you can see I have work to do to learn how to properly use the new camera.
Pentax full-frame and APS-C cameras use the venerable Pentax K mount. Not compatible with your Nikon without adapters with glass in them. Don't bother. I'm actually curious what lenses trumant has although I don't need to be buying more glass right now (should be selling...).
D610 is probably a pretty good camera. I've never used one but they seem decent from a quick glance online. There's a ton of good lenses available in F mount that should work with that camera.
aircooled said:The reason I say that, is that if you have a full camera rig setup (camera, lenses, tripod, bag etc) you may, or will, become far less likely to bring it with you places you might take pictures (as opposed to plan on taking pictures).
Like I say, may not apply to your needs, but sometimes, having a very portable camera greatly increases the chance of getting a great shot. For this reason I specifically avoided a camera body system and went with a fixed lens, so I would not be tempted to stock up on stuff I would have to carry around.
IMHO the modern smartphone has made this argument obsolete. I've ALWAYS got my phone with me, and the camera in it is good enough that I don't see any point to a small dedicated camera.
The one area where a smartphone falls down in photography is the glass, and that's where the SLR/EVIL bodies shine.
Add-ons like flashes, filters, etc are also not so great with a phone vs. "a real camera".
A small dedicated camera can offer these things and usually has faster / more direct controls than a phone. There's are reasons that cameras like the Ricoh GR and Fuji X100's still sell.
A camera body is something of a gateway drug, meaning that you can spend a ton more on good lenses.
In reply to slantsix :
Glad to help, and even better that we will not be competeing for glass on there.
pres589 (djronnebaum) said:I'm actually curious what lenses trumant has although I don't need to be buying more glass right now (should be selling...).
An assortment of DA primes that someone/anyone would get more use out of then me.
As an update :
I got a better camera and some long and short lenses. mid-grade mostly, as I cannot afford $10,000+ long big aperture lens now. We were at the glen for vacation, we stopped in on a Tuesday and some cars were running including an LMP3 car.
I got some decent shots like this.
DSC_7986 by Hyperpack, on Flickr
We were on Turn 2 before the esses where they allow randos like us to watch from on the grandstand area.
Still learning how to focus and shoot behind and through fencing and other obstacles.
Glad you found something you like, I will echo the mirrorless comment. I went from a DSLR with a long lens that I really did like, to a smaller and more compact Canon R50 and so far I love it. SO much more convenient, better picture quality, easier to use, and some new features that I really love. I only have a 210mm lens on it so far, which is fine for most of what I do, but I'll be adding a longer zoom soon.
Yes, I might have to investigate the mirrorless option. For now my somewhat antiquated D610 is good enough for stills and marginally good for action.
Here are some more shots from the summer collection of 2024:
A related trick of sorts: If I don’t have the right gear to shoot action, then I don’t shoot action. Instead, I’ll concentrate on the images within my camera’s capability.
David S. Wallens said:A related trick of sorts: If I don’t have the right gear to shoot action, then I don’t shoot action. Instead, I’ll concentrate on the images within my camera’s capability.
"Don't gripe about the shots you couldn't get, get the shots no one else is thinking to get"
In reply to sleepyhead the buffalo :
Yup.
slantsix said:Yes, I might have to investigate the mirrorless option. For now my somewhat antiquated D610 is good enough for stills and marginally good for action.
Here are some more shots from the summer collection of 2024:
so, I'm in the process of selling off (most) all of my Sony mirrorless stuff (an A7 II, some lenses) and a couple of Canon DSLR lenses to MPB. I've been dinking around the last two years, after shooting a Canon 5D III during OneLap, being unhappy with my Sony gear. I've got some personal reasons why I don't want to hop over to Canon mirrorless, even though that seems like a no-brainer (having liked them in the past and have DSLR stuff to aid the swap).
Around late August, I realized Nikon mirrorless was the way to go for me in the future. They have the shallowest sensor-flange depth, and widest flange diameter, such that one can actually mount Sony FE/E mount mirrorless lenses to Nikon mirrorless bodies with an adapter (among a whole bunch of other stuff). So, as a "toe in the water" step, I bought a Nikon D3200 and a 16-85mm f3.5-5.6 lens for $250. It hasn't been all roses, but I'm much happier with the files I'm getting out of the Nikon compared to the A7 II and a6400 I've been shooting. I'm still weighing what setup I want to end up with, but with used Z5's hovering around $800... I think a Z5 and Z50 setup might be where I end up. In the meantime, though, the D3200 is doing great, and there's a bunch of DSLR stuff available on MPB (and KEH, etc) that's "cents on the dollar"... so don't give up on your D610 yet.
I dunno what mode you're shooting in here. if it's P or Auto, I'd suggest you switch over to "S" mode so you can set the shutter speed, and see if you can crank it down to 1/Focal Length. Or, if your lens has "VR", then start trying around 1/100 to 1/160th of second, and that'll hep you start getting more motion blur in the wheels... which will help images like these above look more "dynamic", if that's what you want to go for. Just keep in mind, that you'll have to work on keeping your panning along with the car smooth, because the slower shutter speed can mean that some blur can creep into the photo from the 'sweep' of the camera not quite matching up with that of the car as it goes by you.
otherwise: awesome job! keep it up!
In reply to sleepyhead the buffalo :
Thank you David and Tim.
As an amateur, I mostly rely on auto mode (probably too much, especially for action shots). I now see the difference in how the cars at speed look "quietly still" !!?!? due to the fast shutter speed the auto mode decides to use.
Thank you for the tips.
I will hafta try some more shutter speed experimentation.
I do have lenses with VR stabilization, but I am unsure if my super-long lens has that setting, I will check on that.
You'll need to log in to post.
