The Photography Thread

[PeteJ]

Good choice in camera for a start

The kit lens is indeed pretty hopeless for the 350d and you may be better off getting Body Only and saving some money. The 17-85 IS USM is a fantastic lens but you are looking at spending an awful lot of money if you get everything in one go.

The last thing you want to do is spend a grand and find yourself never using the camera! On one hand you could just be using the kit lens and get frustrated with the results, but on the other you could spend all that money on the IS lens and never use it.

To be honest, if you aren't so worried about the money then the IS lens + 350d is a good move, but it is a lot of cash still.

Warehouseexpress are a very good company - I've only used them once but have heard good things.

[Alastair]

Most of my shots are with the kit lens for the 300d which I believe to be the same as the kit lens for the 350d, it's not as bad as people make out tbh (Pete) .

Can't comment on the other lens or warehouse express either as I've not used either.

[MartyG]

You won't go wrong with the entry level kits from any of the latest DSLRs tbh, best thing to do is try them all out at Jessops ( or the like ) and see which one you like the feel of best.

Then when you decide that you enjoy the hobby and you'll know you'll make use of them, then you can start buying more expensive lenses

And now, the alien in my parents back garden: http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne...7900209&size=l

[Spatial]

The way I look at it, if I spend that much money I'd make sure I'd use it

It is expensive but I'm looking at it as more of a long term investment really.

I do take a lot of digital photos (don't post them here as they're pretty mediocre due to the age of the camera and what it can do) and the girlfriend is always taking snaps (she's actually got an aging 35mm EOS 1000f) so I don't think it would be left gathering dust.

Like Marty said a try before I buy is a definite tho. Will take a trip to the local camera shop the start of this week.

[Richard.John]

Lenses are for life, not just for Christmas.

The bodies come and go, so spend your money on quality glass.

[Ish]

I hate you PeteJ. I hate you. That waterdrop picture is just too damn good.

[PeteJ]

Thanks And thanks for the fave on flickr!
This was another attempt


I got this just now (click to view large, shows the detail better)


Focus isn't quite right but I quite like the 'pose'.






Can view the rest large here
http://www.flickr.com/photos/peterjohns/

[Ginger Tosser]

Nice collection of bugs again Pete.

[MartyG]

WOW! You just found the ideal Wedding/stagdo/party camera!

Post some examples when you get it! Try some "Low Light" party type shots if possible.

Well, I got this ?12 digital camera today, as you can probably imagine, the build quality isn't really up to much, but the pictures it takes are ok, certainly fine for cost ( and better than my first Olympus digital camera I paid nearly ?200 for @ 640x480 shots, so many years ago ).

The three different resolutions are here, I might add a few more shots in a bit: http://picasaweb.google.com/martypg/...rCameraProject

[Alastair]

Here's a few more shots from the 'hopeless' canon kit lens for you Spatial:

I was in town watching Pride on Saturday, it was busy






And like everyone else I found some flies to snap, remember this isn't a macro lens so it wont be as good as Marty and Petes efforts but it does OK.




Never got a chance to go and do the night time/long exposure shots I wanted to as my motorbike broke down, one day though.

[MartyG]

Another flower shot getting great comments: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bill927...mentscomments/

I really don't understand some of the comments on there - how is that a good composition? The stem of the flower at the front of plane cuts right through the middle of the main point of focus with the ugly blades of grass in sharper focus at the back.

I was going to submit a photo to that group, I think I'll wait ...

[capcom_suicide]

Well, I got this ?12 digital camera today, as you can probably imagine, the build quality isn't really up to much, but the pictures it takes are ok, certainly fine for cost ( and better than my first Olympus digital camera I paid nearly ?200 for @ 640x480 shots, so many years ago ).

The three different resolutions are here, I might add a few more shots in a bit: http://picasaweb.google.com/martypg/...r12CameraShots

Pretty bloody good for 12 quid.

This will be perfect for using is a "Snorkle bag" which is water tight to 3m. (For playing in the pool and snorkling obviously!)

Much more cost effective than the film versions.

Nice find!

[SubparMario]

Have to ask, did anyone buy the camera kit because you wanted to take pictures of insects and flowers? Or is it simply a way to utilise the expensive equipment after you've bought it.

[PeteJ]

Maybe I was a bit harsh on the kit lens then Nice shots above.

I agree about that shot Marty, it's a little bit different and very much eye-catching.

Have to ask, did anyone buy the camera kit because you wanted to take pictures of insects and flowers? Or is it simply a way to utilise the expensive equipment after you've bought it.

Bit of both I guess - buying a Macro lens has opened up a whole new side of photography. Insects and flowers are the obvious way to use it.

[Spatial]

Here's a few more shots from the 'hopeless' canon kit lens for you Spatial

Those are well impressive - better than most of the stuff I've seen taken with the kit lense (the close up shots in particular)