|
I bought a Zigview S2 for my Pentax K10D, mainly for the motion sensor function. The Zigview is a small video camera that mounts to the viewfinder of a DSLR - the package includes adaptors to mount it on Canon, Nikon, Pentax, or Sony DSLRs. There's a small screen with a row of buttons that control the device - on/off, menu selections, etc. There's also a cable to attach it to the camera and allow it to trigger the shutter. The functions include simply using the screen as a tilt/rotate viewfinder, a fairly sophisticated intervalometer, a cable that allows operation of the screen and camera from up to 20 feet away, and the motion sensor. The motion sensor works by dividing the view into nine regions (3 x 3 grid) and measuring the brightness of each part. The default setting is for the Zigview to trigger the shutter if any part of the image either increases or decreases in brightness by a threshold value; the brightness is displayed as a number from 0 to 100, with an arrow showing the change (up for brighter, down for dimmer) since the last measurement. I ordered the Zigview about two weeks ago, and I got a pretty good deal because mine was used as a display model at some trade shows; the package says it won an award in 2007 and the videos (and general layout) on the website suggest it really hasn't changed since then. Possibly, mine sat in a box for years before I called Argraph, the North America distributor. It showed up last night - at the post office Monday, I picked it up Tuesday - just in time for me to take it to an autocross event. This isn't the main reason I bought a motion sensor trigger for my camera, but the severe lack of other photographers at most events means I hardly ever get any pictures of *me*. I had about 20 minutes to unpack it and try to figure it out before I went to the event. Clearly, I need to play with this thing some more - basic functions like changing the number of shots it takes before reverting to standby mode were beyond my abilities last night (the default is 10), but I did get some shots that let me figure out some important points; I only used the motion sensor capability, I haven't yet played with any of the other functions. First, there's a delay of about 0.1s between the motion sensor detecting a change in brightness and triggering the shutter. I don't know if that can be reduced, but if it cannot it means I need to choose shooting locations and directions very carefully. Most of the shots I got of cars going past include only the back half of the car.  Zigview First Attempt 1 by Execudork, on Flickr For example, this is the only shot I got of me on course. Note the way I'm escaping out the left side of the frame. Faster drivers than I were almost completely out of frame; I have several shots of just the rear quarter panel and bumper. Second, the way it attaches to my camera is rather loose, due to some damage around the viewfinder of my camera. There are some shims included with the Zigview that can help align it, and I'll need to fiddle with it some more. Third, setting up the motion sensor to trigger only on some parts of the image, and setting threshold brightnesses, is probably the key to effectively using this thing.  Zigview First Attempt 2 by Execudork, on Flickr I also got several shots of traffic going past on the highway. Bigger vehicles occupied enough of the viewfinder's area to affect the brightness.  Zigview First Attempt 3 by Execudork, on Flickr Interestingly, I have few pictures of any of the light-coloured cars (white, silver), I guess they didn't change the brightness of the image enough to trigger a shot. This hilariously-sliding BMW did trip it, for some reason. Overall, I'm pretty happy with this thing. I've got to work out how long the battery lasts as well as fine-tuning the sensitivity, and making sure shutter speeds are fast enough to deal with the subject matter. For less than $300 (regular price is closer to $500, like I said, display model) I might have something that will tell me when a polar bear visits my campsite in the Arctic this summer.  Zigview First Attempt 4 by Execudork, on Flickr I count this as "a good start" - I have some ideas about how to take better pictures using my Zigview thanks to some practice; more is required.
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2013 02:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 18:48 |
|
|
Alright I'm at a loss. I'm going to a concert in 2 weeks and would love to get some pictures. I know I know, 'just enjoy the concert and forget about pictures!' but I just can't. After all, I do lurk in the dorkroom. Few things: I currently shoot with a D600. I'll try to get that + a small prime in but if I can't... I will be in the pit (not press/photog pit, just regular audience pit). I need something that looks like "non professional." My budget is $400. With these things in mind, what's my best bet? Sony NEX, Micro-four thirds, 2/3" sensored Fujis or Canon S100/S110? Obviously autofocus and low light are the top things that come to mind. I've used an NEX-5n before and quite liked it, but how close would current generation high end point and shoots compare? I'd love to swing for an RX100 but it's just too expensive.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2013 01:24
|
|
|
Polarize posted:Alright I'm at a loss. I'm going to a concert in 2 weeks and would love to get some pictures. I know I know, 'just enjoy the concert and forget about pictures!' but I just can't. After all, I do lurk in the dorkroom. Foo on that. You can do both. Pictures make concerts more fun, in my opinion. If it's not some huge concert where photographing from the audience is actually viable, just get there early with your camera and a fast 50mm. The only way to know how much the venue actually cares to enforce any restrictions on cameras is to try your luck. A lot don't care/are flexible, even when they publically state otherwise, as long as you aren't an rear end in a top hat. If you know for certain the venue will have very anti-camera security just rent an RX-1 for the day. https://www.lensrentals.com/rent/sony/cyber-shot/sony-cyber-shot-rx1
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2013 02:09
|
|
|
An Olympus Stylus Epic loaded with HP5 pushed to 3200 makes for a great stealth concert camera.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2013 02:45
|
|
|
HPL posted:An Olympus Stylus Epic loaded with HP5 pushed to 3200 makes for a great stealth concert camera. Second (except Tri-X because I live in AMERICA).  Guided by Voices at the Crystal Ballroom, best concert I've been to.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2013 02:48
|
|
|
HPL posted:An Olympus Stylus Epic loaded with HP5 pushed to 3200 makes for a great stealth concert camera. I just got a film camera and mostly shoot concerts. Is there a reason to not use the Delta 3200 other than it being much less useful in daytime?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2013 03:23
|
|
|
fivre posted:I just got a film camera and mostly shoot concerts. Is there a reason to not use the Delta 3200 other than it being much less useful in daytime? HP5/Tri-X is cheaper and more versatile and will shoot at 3200 just as well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2013 03:32
|
|
|
HP5 and Tri-X actually shoot better at 3200 than Delta 3200. Delta 3200 is more for folks that don't know how to push film or do and plan on cranking it to 6400 or 12800.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2013 04:00
|
|
|
Delta 3200 is for people that
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2013 09:07
|
|
|
Delta 3200 is grainy as poo poo, but it can be pushed to 12800 and still produce something resembling a picture. I only bought it once.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2013 09:50
|
|
|
That lovely old Tamron 70-300 f4-5.6 Macro of mine finally broke completely. AF didn't work for a while, and now I get communication errors all day long. I suppose nothing stops me from removing the contacts and convert it to a manual lens? If I take pictures with it, it's stationary and more for screwing around, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2013 11:10
|
|
|
The only roll of Delta 3200 in my possession is an imposter. It's raison'd'etre is to be in my film bag so they don't x-ray it at the airport.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2013 13:03
|
|
|
I have the opposite problem: I own 2 rolls of Delta 3200, both of which are almost certainly completely exposed by being sent through an X-ray machine when I bought them. They are 2/3 of my eBay purchase from a seller in Sweden. I shot and developed the first roll and it's a perfectly uniform smooth grey ribbon. I think Canada Customs is afraid of vikings.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2013 20:39
|
|
|
mclifford82 posted:
I had never heard of this before you mentioned it so thanks for a heads up. I just finished building a trigger cable using instructions found here: http://bitshift.bi.funpic.de/en/dslr-remote/hardware/cable-s.php?lang=EN Mine:  Just need to insulate it somehow, probably going to encase it in epoxy. It's originally to be used with another app called DSLR Remote, but it is working fine so far with my original HTC EVO and my Rebel XT. The Android app seems less featured than the IOS app so far no lighting mode, etc.. supposidly they are working on it. I've only been screwing around with it just a little bit so far but it will come in handy I'm sure. I had most of that parts already laying around except for the cable that connects it to the actual camera.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2013 16:41
|
|
|
So I'm looking to buy a longer lens for shooting birds. I've seen the 70-300 Tamron VC recommended, but was wondering about the Nikon 70-300 VR as well. Basically at this point I can pick up the Tamron for about $400 new (after rebates) or the Nikon used for about 300. From what I've seen there isn't any significant difference between the two optically. Is it worth paying the extra $100 for a new lens/warranty?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 18:49
|
|
|
nop posted:So I'm looking to buy a longer lens for shooting birds. I've seen the 70-300 Tamron VC recommended, but was wondering about the Nikon 70-300 VR as well. Basically at this point I can pick up the Tamron for about $400 new (after rebates) or the Nikon used for about 300. From what I've seen there isn't any significant difference between the two optically. Is it worth paying the extra $100 for a new lens/warranty? The Tamron is generally a tiny bit better optically than the cheap nikon 70-300VR (might not be a big deal unless you pixel peep), as well as having a better vibration reduction system. That said, you can pick up the Tamron used for about 300 bucks too (320 on amazon right now, with prime shipping).
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 19:40
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:The Tamron is generally a tiny bit better optically than the cheap nikon 70-300VR (might not be a big deal unless you pixel peep), as well as having a better vibration reduction system. Yeah, I would probably pick up the Tamron if I could find it used, unfortunately Amazon.com doesn't ship to Canada. Even if they did I'd end up with about $50 worth of taxes that would really kill the deal...
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 21:14
|
|
|
HPL posted:An Olympus Stylus Epic loaded with HP5 pushed to 3200 makes for a great stealth concert camera. Extremely dumb question, but how do you push your film with an Epic?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 21:59
|
|
|
OK so finally I found a thread that's relevant to my interests. What you are looking to buy Just looking for a cheap camera that's most recommended for the budget. Budget About ~$300, I don't want to spend more than that. Your photo gear you already have None. What you plan on using your purchase for I want to take progress pictures when I lift because I find it motivating, hence why I'm not spending $1k+. What you find limiting about what you have now I have a camera phone but the quality is absolute poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 22:14
|
|
|
Dangerous Mind posted:OK so finally I found a thread that's relevant to my interests. Canon S95/S100
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 22:25
|
|
|
Dangerous Mind posted:OK so finally I found a thread that's relevant to my interests. Generally the best canon point and shoot in your price range (in this case, S95/S100). There are occasionally other ones which compete, but Canon ones are always great and safe. Also going to recommend going to your local library and renting a copy of "Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Peterson (Or acquiring it through purchasing, borrowing, whatever). Lots of the information will likely be overkill if you never really go beyond automatic settings, but grasping the basics of photography will ensure your photos are markedly improved (using the same equipment). More expensive equipment makes acquiring difficult shots easier, or possible- but knowledge will make even smartphones take better pictures ( http://fstoppers.com/iphone )
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 22:39
|
|
|
Maybe consider a cheap M4/3 body and lens, that way you have some upgrade potential if you ever want more control than a P+S and you're protected in case your body/lens craps out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 23:07
|
|
|
Shmoogy posted:Generally the best canon point and shoot in your price range (in this case, S95/S100). There are occasionally other ones which compete, but Canon ones are always great and safe. I really doubt you need to read understanding exposure if you literally just want to take body progress shots. When basically all you need to know is more light = better picture
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 23:11
|
|
|
doctor 7 posted:I really doubt you need to read understanding exposure if you literally just want to take body progress shots. When basically all you need to know is more light = better picture That's what I was thinking ... was kinda blown away at the suggestion of anything beyond a basic point and shoot. Unless he see's himself getting into photography later down the road .. get whatever cheap turd you can that takes decent pictures (aka go to best buy and take some pictures).
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 23:13
|
|
|
mAlfunkti0n posted:That's what I was thinking ... was kinda blown away at the suggestion of anything beyond a basic point and shoot. Unless he see's himself getting into photography later down the road .. get whatever cheap turd you can that takes decent pictures (aka go to best buy and take some pictures). OTOH Basic m4/3 bodies and a lens can actually be cheaper than a nice point and shoot, for the cost of the s100 you could probably score a used E-pm2 and lens. If you aren't looking for absolute compactness it's a perfectly fine option, even if you're going to leave it in auto mode forever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 23:21
|
|
|
doctor 7 posted:I really doubt you need to read understanding exposure if you literally just want to take body progress shots. When basically all you need to know is more light = better picture I guess that's true- I figured if he's willing to spend $300 on a camera, clearly the quality matters and/or a passing interest in photography. Cheapest Canon point & shoot and a tripod so you're not taking pictures in the mirror.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 23:24
|
|
|
mAlfunkti0n posted:That's what I was thinking ... was kinda blown away at the suggestion of anything beyond a basic point and shoot. Unless he see's himself getting into photography later down the road .. get whatever cheap turd you can that takes decent pictures (aka go to best buy and take some pictures). I was actually always kind of interested in photography since I was younger. If I had the funds I would have amassed a lot of photographs of clouds already which is what I wanted a camera for (I love the random shapes and colors they can be). Later when I get a job that isn't minimum wage I'll definitely consider getting a really good camera.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 00:30
|
|
|
mAlfunkti0n posted:That's what I was thinking ... was kinda blown away at the suggestion of anything beyond a basic point and shoot. Unless he see's himself getting into photography later down the road .. get whatever cheap turd you can that takes decent pictures (aka go to best buy and take some pictures). It really won't be any worse in terms of megapixels since P+S have hit the diffraction limit and so the megapixels haven't been counting up like larger sensors. At the least they have immensely better value retention, a several generation-old body has depreciated about as much as it's going to and lenses don't really depreciate much at all. And yeah, you still have Auto mode with the ability to take a little more control manually and get RAWs if you want to shoot in strange lighting conditions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 00:58
|
|
|
Dangerous Mind posted:I was actually always kind of interested in photography since I was younger. If I had the funds I would have amassed a lot of photographs of clouds already which is what I wanted a camera for (I love the random shapes and colors they can be). Later when I get a job that isn't minimum wage I'll definitely consider getting a really good camera. If you don't mind going used, you can get a T1i off ebay for around $300. An XSi should be easy to get under $300. These cameras are definitely getting long in the tooth, but you can still take great photos with them, and they accept pro lenses just fine. Might be a decent option if you think you might get into photography in the future.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 00:59
|
|
|
xzzy posted:If you don't mind going used, you can get a T1i off ebay for around $300. An XSi should be easy to get under $300. These cameras are definitely getting long in the tooth, but you can still take great photos with them, and they accept pro lenses just fine. Might be a decent option if you think you might get into photography in the future. I would suggest more towards a 30-40d. They can be had around the same price but are way more user friendly in my experience.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 01:08
|
|
|
Dangerous Mind posted:I was actually always kind of interested in photography since I was younger. If I had the funds I would have amassed a lot of photographs of clouds already which is what I wanted a camera for (I love the random shapes and colors they can be). Later when I get a job that isn't minimum wage I'll definitely consider getting a really good camera. For what it's worth I recently bought my dad a Canon S160 for $150 on sale. He's going on a trip for a month or so and I thought it would make a good father's day gift. It goes up to 1600 ISO (which means you can take photos in lower light levels) but it also allows for full manual control of everything in terms of shutter speed, aperture and ISO, which is a pretty big deal if you want to get into photography. The pictures it takes aren't great but it's about 1/2 the price of the S95/100 people are recommending. You'll have to buy an SD, but you can get an 8GB one (which'll hold 2000 pictures of the highest quality the camera can take) for another $10 including tax and shipping off Amazon. Ultimately it'll do all you need in terms of taking progress pictures and it'll allow you do do some photography basics if you want to expand your knowledge without breaking the bank. Keeping in mind I'm focusing more on price than quality here, the S95/100 are objectively better and more expensive. However you can probably get a used T2i with a it lens for that price. doctor 7 fucked around with this message at 01:31 on Jun 20, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 01:28
|
|
|
A cheap M4/3 body and a compact normal-ish lens or a kit lens (slightly bigger) would be my recommendation if you can tolerate the size. It'll be a lot closer to P+S size than a DSLR will.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 02:02
|
|
|
So in terms of bang for the buck, am I better off with the S100 for $314 or the SX160 for $132 (both off Amazon)? I'm thinking that as long as I don't plan to pursue photography for the next 2-3 years I should keep it cheap for now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 04:21
|
|
|
S100, definitely.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 15:25
|
|
|
Eh I'd say if you don't plan on doing photography seriously for a few years the S160 is enough to do body progress shots. In another 2 years there will be a newer/better S100 for the same price or maybe you'll have a better job than minimum wage and can afford an entry level DSLR. If you can honestly afford the S100 now though it is a better camera all around. So get that one if it won't break the bank.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 16:54
|
|
|
doctor 7 posted:Eh I'd say if you don't plan on doing photography seriously for a few years the S160 is enough to do body progress shots. I'll probably go with the S160 then. Money isn't a problem since I've managed to save a lot the past year (I'm in college, too) but as long as I'm not doing photography seriously I don't see the point in spending more at the moment. Thanks for the help everyone.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 18:25
|
|
|
Buy a basic P&S now, save for an eventual future camera. If you find you don't actually enjoy photography, there's always hookers and blow.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 22:11
|
|
|
Ramms+ein posted:Extremely dumb question, but how do you push your film with an Epic? Modify the DX code on the film canister and then develop the film longer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 22:44
|
|
|
I think I had a link for just that in the film thread... let me dig it up. Here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2013 03:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 18:48 |
|
|
Is there a new 50mm/1.4 coming from Sigma? It's currently not listed at all on their site, and I heard something about a revision, but without decent source.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2013 17:17
|
|