[Hutnicks]

Quote:

Well I have always cringed at bridge/superzooms. However, Fuji is probably the one exception because I have read good things about that camera. IMO I believe that if your going to get something like a bridge camera then you might as well go up to a DSLR or Mirrorless because of the features, image quality, amount of lenses, and everything minus the price. However now cameras have gotten so good that even the iPhone is being compared to DSLR quality. Although after owning a DSLR I don't think I can go back to not having one. But I'm glad that you don't regret your purchase and found something that works for you, because that is really the most important thing; something that you enjoy to take pictures with and something that wont sit in a desk drawer for years without being touched. 
 
Nice Pic BTW
 
Here's a recent pic that I took while in Arizona 
 

Excellent shot. What time of day was it to get that colour sky?
 
Well the old saying that the best camera is the one that you will carry is more than true for digital. I'm at the point where the glam has long gone so the Red Ball is just another box. With the Fuji when all was said and done I could not find a reason NOT to buy it while I could come up with hundreds of reasons for just about every other box. And of course by the time I'd procrastinated enough it was out of production so I had to order one in from across the country Bridge and Prosumer are two terms that really irk me. Bridge to what exactly? It sure isn't a trainer for a DSLR, perhaps a mirrorless, but then again if you are not looking for an interchangeable lens solution it is a bridge to nowhere. I just think of it as a box that does a job. Sort of like the guys who bought FE2's and only one or two zoom lenses. (A Leica CL with a Tele Elmarit 90 was my go to for years. Some hated the CL. I had several and loved every one. Compact Featured Light as a feather, and if you knew what you were doing just about any M lens could be made to work.) Usability rather than lugability became my criterion.

 

[kever910]

Quote:

Excellent shot. What time of day was it to get that colour sky?
 
Well the old saying that the best camera is the one that you will carry is more than true for digital. I'm at the point where the glam has long gone so the Red Ball is just another box. With the Fuji when all was said and done I could not find a reason NOT to buy it while I could come up with hundreds of reasons for just about every other box. And of course by the time I'd procrastinated enough it was out of production so I had to order one in from across the country Bridge and Prosumer are two terms that really irk me. Bridge to what exactly? It sure isn't a trainer for a DSLR, perhaps a mirrorless, but then again if you are not looking for an interchangeable lens solution it is a bridge to nowhere. I just think of it as a box that does a job. Sort of like the guys who bought FE2's and only one or two zoom lenses. (A Leica CL with a Tele Elmarit 90 was my go to for years. Some hated the CL. I had several and loved every one. Compact Featured Light as a feather, and if you knew what you were doing just about any M lens could be made to work.) Usability rather than lugability became my criterion.

Ya thats understandable and as the saying goes "to each his own". That the same way with DSLR's , for instance if I were to give it to anyone of my friends they would just stare at it in confusion. And also me with film, I was born during the ages of film but been with been with digital cameras more years than not. So if given a film camera I would uncomfortable. So my point I guess that I realized is that I guess not every camera is for everyone. For me its my DSLR, I love the image quality and I love the features on it so I can fiddle around with it every so often. I just for some reason I can not explain would not want to buy a Superzoom ( you're right bridge camera is not a good name for it, so I'll stick with super zoom from now on). Maybe it's just a bias of mine. Either way I am not a person of practicality so I make compromises with my camera in order to obtain image quality and control (not that the fuji doesn't have that) but it is just right for me. And my iPhone for everything else...
 
Anyway back to your first question. It was a clear mid afternoon day. I just did a bit of editing in Aperture 3 with it. Heres the original:
 

 
Anyways wayy past my bedtime so it was good talking to you Mr. Hutnicks so good night and we can pick this up in the morning if you like. 

 

[Hutnicks]

Quote:

Ya thats understandable and as the saying goes "to each his own". That the same way with DSLR's , for instance if I were to give it to anyone of my friends they would just stare at it in confusion. And also me with film, I was born during the ages of film but been with been with digital cameras more years than not. So if given a film camera I would uncomfortable. So my point I guess that I realized is that I guess not every camera is for everyone. For me its my DSLR, I love the image quality and I love the features on it so I can fiddle around with it every so often. I just for some reason I can not explain would not want to buy a Superzoom ( you're right bridge camera is not a good name for it, so I'll stick with super zoom from now on). Maybe it's just a bias of mine. Either way I am not a person of practicality so I make compromises with my camera in order to obtain image quality and control (not that the fuji doesn't have that) but it is just right for me. And my iPhone for everything else...
 
Anyway back to your first question. It was a clear mid afternoon day. I just did a bit of editing in Aperture 3 with it. Heres the original:
 

 
Anyways wayy past my bedtime so it was good talking to you Mr. Hutnicks so good night and we can pick this up in the morning if you like. 

It was a pleasure talking with you as well Mr Kever.
 
Long weekend and good weather here for a change so out and about. Have a P6000 which has decided to drain batteries at an alarming rate to figure out.
 
Don't get me wrong I have nothing against the DSLR.  I can simply get the results I want with the uberZoom and a couple of filters. There is still a lot of stigma among us old filmoids that a zoom cannot ever be as good as a prime lens. So we carried about a billion prime lenses around for every occasion The technology has changed so much that an uberZoom can give terrific results. Jpeg quality that it is that rose shot blows up quite well without retouching (took out two small dirt spots on the bottom and thats it). It was shot through a century optics .55x flip flop wide angle macro filter. Thats pushing glass to the limit.
 
The thing that I still need film for is long exposures. I have never been happy with digitals results to date on that. It was one of the determining factors on the Fuji purchase as once I eliminated long exposure ability from the selection criteria, new horizons opened up.

 

[kever910]

Quote:

 
The thing that I still need film for is long exposures. I have never been happy with digitals results to date on that. It was one of the determining factors on the Fuji purchase as once I eliminated long exposure ability from the selection criteria, new horizons opened up.

Hmm never thought about that... I have always liked doing long exposures because I really like landscape photography but I dislike using my DSLR for that because I feel like I'm somehow damaging my sensor form keeping it on for too long. It's probably just me being paranoid but I just don't want to find that my sensor has a million hot pixels or something terrible like that. I actually did some research on this but I could not find anything conclusive. Like I said it's probably just me being paranoid. But film's a good idea, unfortunately I need a nikon film camera and a good wide angle lens.

 

[Hutnicks]

Quote:

Hmm never thought about that... I have always liked doing long exposures because I really like landscape photography but I dislike using my DSLR for that because I feel like I'm somehow damaging my sensor form keeping it on for too long. It's probably just me being paranoid but I just don't want to find that my sensor has a million hot pixels or something terrible like that. I actually did some research on this but I could not find anything conclusive. Like I said it's probably just me being paranoid. But film's a good idea, unfortunately I need a nikon film camera and a good wide angle lens.

You can pick up a decent film camera from a Nikkormat on up to the F3 (last of the great SLR's) fairly cheap now. Unless you need a fisheye a wide angle is easily had as well.

 

[shigzeo]

F3's go pretty cheap now. 
 
I just had to pick up a 28-70/2,8 AFS lens as the studio won't abide Ai/S lenses on the job. Japanese studios shoot VERY differently from Canadian ones. It's like going back in time, way back. Getting the shot means only: focus and a semblance of subject. The artistry that has shown up in recent weddings abroad is absent. Oh well. The entire affair is plasticised: in hotels on cinderella seats with fake preachers and you have to invite your entire office... not a nice happy event. 

 

[Hutnicks]

Quote:

F3's go pretty cheap now. 
 
I just had to pick up a 28-70/2,8 AFS lens as the studio won't abide Ai/S lenses on the job. Japanese studios shoot VERY differently from Canadian ones. It's like going back in time, way back. Getting the shot means only: focus and a semblance of subject. The artistry that has shown up in recent weddings abroad is absent. Oh well. The entire affair is plasticised: in hotels on cinderella seats with fake preachers and you have to invite your entire office... not a nice happy event. 

I keep my eye open for an F3T, they still seem to fetch a good price though. I traded my F3 for an M6 and it is the only camera I have ever owned which I regret getting rid of.
 
 Your description of the shoot has me thinking of Miami in the 70's for some reason, polyester hell

 

[Frank I]

 
Ithaca  NY on Cornell University campus shot with the Nikon 16-85 lens

 

[Frank I]

 

 
 

These are all on Cornell's Campus and

 

[shigzeo]

Quote:

 

 
 

These are all on Cornell's Campus and

How I miss green, water, skies, and anything but farting, sneaky, money-grubbing person people who duck to each other politely but inside think: 'you person'. I've got to get out of Asia. I want to experience something other than humanity again.

 

[Frank I]

Quote:

How I miss green, water, skies, and anything but farting, sneaky, money-grubbing person people who duck to each other politely but inside think: 'you person'. I've got to get out of Asia. I want to experience something other than humanity again.

you need professional help

 

[shigzeo]

Quote:

you need professional help

Very possibly. BTW, D800 update brings the biggest feature: TTL for stopped-down liveview in A and M modes. Previously (for a bloody year now), D800 users had to switch ISO up or shutter speed way way down to focus and compose in live view as the screen would reflect the lens setting, not the SLR (lens free setting). Great for work now!

 

[gkanai]

Quote:

How I miss green, water, skies, and anything but farting, sneaky, money-grubbing person people who duck to each other politely but inside think: 'you person'. I've got to get out of Asia. I want to experience something other than humanity again.

 
Dude, you just need to get out of Kanto.
 

 

[kever910]

Hey I have a question to all that are following this thread: What is your opinion on the whole Megapixel Race? 
 
I have been contemplating this for a while and do not have anyone where I live to discuss it about. My personal opinion is that it is good to have and it eventually leads into technological advancements but other than that I do not find tons of megapixels to be extremely helpful other than clogging up my hard drive. My D5100 has plenty of MP and anything more would be really unnecessary. Heck, I would go with 10 MP in a heart beat. If I were the head of the R&D department of Nikon or even Canon, I would be focusing my time on noise performance, dynamic range, and so on. It almost gets to the point where it is too much. I mean as good as the D800/D800E are, is it really that much better than the old D700? Anyways post your thoughts.

 

[bigshot]

I've printed a medium sized poster from a 3 mp camera and gotten great results. Resolution is generally overrated. Anything over 10 megapixels is overkill for normal use, so we're well into the range of overkill. But there are always number hounds on the internet who say that a three year old camera is "hopelessly obsolete" because it doesn't have as many pixels as the newest model.
 
The same is true of high ISO performance. Back in the film days, you shot with ASAs that even cameraphones can exceed. My new D7000 can shoot in a dim room without a flash. But does it look good? No, because low light like that generally is no substitute for good lighting. Noise and dynamic range are very good in current models. Nothing broken there.
 
DSLRs aren't perfect though. At this point, the area that I think needs improvement is video capabilities and smooth continuous focus that video requires. Shooting video with my D7000 is a complete joke. Not even close to being useful.