Nikon D3300 new camera

[old head]

 Good to know.

Not opposed to buying lens covers and other do-dads but I do know that I don't enough to make decisions about add ons yet.  the videos on you tube make it look like you have to have this or that to make good pics.  I suspect it will in specific situations, so to me its about exploring the limits of my ability and what I want out of a picture.

I know I don't want to pack around bag full lenses and paraphernalia, been down that road when I was younger and didn't like it.  I suspect it will be a few lens covers, extra battery, and an extra SD card.  I can see only one lens as long as it does what I want most of the time.  Not looking to be a professional or anything, just looking to have some quality photos to remember the experience of the trip.

Old Head

[boatdetective]

-It sounds really trite- but get used to looking at the subject critically. It's all about light and how you capture it. If you are into landscapes- think about Ansel Adams and how he would camp out until the light was just right. The more you consider the subject, the more prepared you will be to make the picture.  I know guys with $10,000 systems in my business who i can out shoot using only a compact camera.  Once you really understand what is going on- then you will realize if any of your gear is holding you back.

I'm as guilty as the next person of buying doo dads that i don't end up using. At this point- I've been doing it long enough that i can pare down my kit to the essentials.  Having said that- there are plentuy of times that i've experimented with gear to learn.

[LowRyter]

BD, you and Rocker have has the eye for great photos.  So does Deke.

[rboe]

Defining "good" is tricky. Michael Reichmann of https://luminous-landscape.com/ pointed out that a shot he took using a LensBaby lens (or was it a toy camera? It was a while back) of a cafe  scene: It was soft to out of focus, technically it was a train wreck. But it was a good photograph because the composition was great, the mood was terrific. It had a lot going for it so it worked.

He wanted to show that you can get way too caught up in the mechanics and the equipment while losing sight of the final picture.

Don't lose sight of enjoying the hobby either. Have fun, experiment, work within - for the most part - of your equipment and don't spend money until you realize that equipment is holding you back (e.g. you decide bird shots are "the thing" and you need a good telephoto lens, or perhaps a macro....).

And don't stop using your camera in your phone (if yours has one that is). Some of those phone cameras are way better than they have a right to be.

[boatdetective]

BD, you and Rocker have the eye for great photos.

I wouldn't say that. I can't take people pictures to save my life. I use my camera to illustrate technical reports of failure analysis- lots of fractured gears and damaged fiberglass. The process of "seeing" and thinking first is the same. Most people believe that buying technology and setting it to "automatic" will do everything.  The fallacy of this is the reason why many photographers like to use the verb "making" a picture.

[AJ Huff]

Funny, I gave up film 10 years ago but got back into it last month. Currently have 4 different cameras loaded and shooting right now in addition to my three digital cameras. Just follow your mood and enjoy.

-AJ

[boatdetective]

There are some things that make me miss film. In one way- there was a lot more on the line. For me, being in the field and NOT being able to confirm the shot meant you never had "mulligans". There were plenty of times when I would wait with baited breath at the print shop to see if I nailed the shot.

Of course, digital gives me a lot more peace of mind. When you are off on assignment in the bilge of some boat far from home- you really NEED to know that you captured what you came for.

My last film camera was a Nikon F100. Magnificent piece of gear and a joy to use.

[rodekyll]

I still have a few Nikon F's and F3's around, and a lot of accessories for those originals.  I sold my F4 because the F's did everything I needed in the field, and it was too pretty to risk.  Sometimes I wish I'd kept it.

I shoot 4x5" and 8x10" sheet film "field" cameras.  These have the long racks and bellows, weigh a ton, and cost from $10 - $25 every time you press the shutter release.  But a contact print is the size of a standard postcard (4x5) or standard portrait (8x10) and can be enlarged to cover a wall, so a good picture is worth it. 

I made adapters to put my DSLR where the focusing screens would be on the big cameras.  So I can shoot digital through my 100 year-old lenses to get the exposure where I want it, and then switch to sheet film when it's right.  The savings has been tremendous. 

[chuck peterson]

My favorite resource, mostly because it's not about cameras, but images

http://www.johnpaulcaponigro.com

[old head]

Well, took about 50-60 pics over the last 2 days.  I am blown away with the quality of the images, not my artistic choices, but the images that this camera can do.

the inside images I used the A-81 warming lens cover, made a noticeable difference.  It has been overcast outside and took some without and with the cover just to see.  Not as noticeable but I think it made the image better.

Still learning about the camera, but just amazed at the quality and detail.  I think I will order a polarizing filter next.  sure wish I had done this earlier, but life is too short to think about what if's.  Moving forward and upward.

Old Head

[Nic in Western NYS]

I'm still using my first DSLR camera, an early model Canon Rebel.  It's hasn't moved me because of shutter delay.  I can't get the candids I want and its too frustrating overall for nature shots with moving animals.  I'm guessing that the newer DSLRs have fixed this problem with faster processing speeds - am I right on that?

(If anyone on this list wants a camera bag filled with beautiful Canon lenses and and AE-1 (film) camera, let me know.  I've been saving it for years because the lenses are so good I figured there would be a way to turn them into good digital astrophotography tools, but I haven't been able to do it.  Won't be free but pretty much for a song - want these to go to someone who can do them right.)

When I was young, spent a lot of time in the darkroom and was really into photography.  Now I use the phone- maybe the next phone will be chosen based on the camera.  I just don't carry anything around other than wallet and phone these days. Great thread!

[Scud]

I agree on using a neutral filter as protection for the lens - especially when/if you upgrade. I wouldn't worry too much about the lens that came with the kit.

A relatively inexpensive, and worthy upgrade, is a small external flash. Even the smallest units are far superior to the built-in flashes.

Another, if you plan to use it for video, is an upgraded microphone. One with a few settings so you can choose to focus on the sound ahead of you - or capture the ambient sounds all around.

I have an older Nikon DSLR, my daughter uses it for her high-school broadcasting program - it takes excellent quality video.

[boatdetective]

Head- you are experimenting- excellent!  Polarizers can make a huge difference. Research your own camera- but I'm almost certain you will need a circular polarizer. It depends on the metering in your camera and yes, it makes a difference.

As for using warming filters and all- many digital cameras today have options in the menu to allow you to tweak the color balance and hue of the image. They might give you options like "vivid, natural, sharp". On Fuji cameras, the feature mimics their own films (Provia, Astia, Velvia). The point I'm trying to make is that you may already have built in ability to digitally tweak images.  This is one reason why the filter business (other than polarizing filters) is in bad shape.

The photo review websites (dpreview and imaging resource) can be helpful in pointing out the internal features of your camera:  https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d3300


 

[old head]

I have been reading and following Ken Rockwell's set up recommendations for the D3300.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d3300/users-guide/

I have been reading, watching, and listening to people who sound like they know what they are doing  to get a good base of information and then branch out from there.  You tube is awesome, lots of tutorials.

Circular Polarization lens cover is what I think also.  I like the idea of gradient Neutral density filter also, seems like a good idea when shooting outdoor landscapes.  I have a flash on my old vivitar 35mm, but the flashes have probably gotten much better in the last 30 years I would think.

I have a few pics where the autofocus focused on things closer in than what I was trying to take.  Need to read up some more on that I guess.  Its on area focus now, maybe I need to try the single setting?

Toys, toys, toys.....does it ever stop?

Old Head

[LowRyter]

Nic-  shutter delay is not a problem for most modern digital cameras, particularly the DSLR/DSLT.  You should be able to keep all your Canon gear and purchase a new body that will work fine.  Even a newer used $200 Rebel.

Check the forums, like DP and some sites with used equipment.

[Nic in Western NYS]

Nic-  shutter delay is not a problem for most modern digital cameras, particularly the DSLR/DSLT.  You should be able to keep all your Canon gear and purchase a new body that will work fine.  Even a newer used $200 Rebel.

Check the forums, like DP and some sites with used equipment.

Thanks, I figured the new ones are fine with shutter delay.
Unfortunately, the lenses are all FD series.  Here's what wiki says:

Canon obsoleted the FD mount by its decision to create the all-electronic EF mount. Thus, the FD mount system, with no provision for auto-focus, is now commercially obsolete, and Canon FD cameras and lenses are available for low prices on the second-hand market. This makes the system very attractive to 35mm film photographers who demand the highest optical quality,[2][3] while not needing auto focus capability.

FD lenses are now enjoying a bit of a renaissance since they can be used on a mirrorless interchangeable-lens camera with a suitable adapter. High-quality lenses at relatively low prices are very attractive for that application and the lack of autofocus is not a big objection due to new technologies which aid manual focus accuracy. 

I'm looking to see if there is a "mirrorless interchangeable-lens camera" that would work with the right available adapter.

[rboe]

Sony has some mirrorless bodies that, with the right adaptor, will take those lenses.

Nikon and Pentax are the only two I'm aware of that can use all of their older lenses (with the exception of one Pentax lens) although the very early M42 Pentax lenses need a thread to bayonet adaptor ring.

[Nic in Western NYS]

Sony has some mirrorless bodies that, with the right adaptor, will take those lenses.

Nikon and Pentax are the only two I'm aware of that can use all of their older lenses (with the exception of one Pentax lens) although the very early M42 Pentax lenses need a thread to bayonet adaptor ring.

Looking into it - Olympus EP-1 seems to work at a low price

[Two Checks]

Nic your camera is slow because it uses. Obsolete compact flash memory cards. They are slow. The camera cant download to the card very fast so the buffer cant accept another image until the.image gets written to the card.
Ther are faster cf cards but they are very spendy.
Time to upgrade.

[Nic in Western NYS]

Nic your camera is slow because it uses. Obsolete compact flash memory cards. They are slow. The camera cant download to the card very fast so the buffer cant accept another image until the.image gets written to the card.
Ther are faster cf cards but they are very spendy.
Time to upgrade.

Makes sense.  I'm cheap so have been avoiding this.  The idea of using my Canon FD's with a modern body is appealing.

[LowRyter]

Nic- I didn't realized those lenses were obsolete in 1987. 

Sony makes adapters for the E mount but I am not sure for what lens mounts.  I don't think it's a satisfactory solution (even if they make an adapter for your lenses).   Almost anyone that starts with idea of using an adapter quickly switches to the dedicated lenses due to size, ease of operation and speed. 

I am somewhat in the same boat.  I have Sony (Minolta) mount lenses and Sony still makes new cameras that support it.  However, the new Sony mirrorless E-mount (both fullframe and APS-C) really has some advantages over my DSLT.  I'll keep my A-mount for now and am not ready to make the jump. 

[Nic in Western NYS]

Nic- I didn't realized those lenses were obsolete in 1987. 

Sony makes adapters for the E mount but I am not sure for what lens mounts.  I don't think it's a satisfactory solution (even if they make an adapter for your lenses).   Almost anyone that starts with idea of using an adapter quickly switches to the dedicated lenses due to size, ease of operation and speed. 

I am somewhat in the same boat.  I have Sony (Minolta) mount lenses and Sony still makes new cameras that support it.  However, the new Sony mirrorless E-mount (both fullframe and APS-C) really has some advantages over my DSLT.  I'll keep my A-mount for and am not ready to make the jump.

Yeah, I've had them sitting for a long time.  This thread got me looking into options again and the Olympus EP-1 is an option but I don't know if the adapter has glass elements and will degrade the image or if its just a spacer.  Time for me to do the homework on this.

[rboe]

Check out dpreview.com for the skinny on those cameras. Excellent review process, less bias (especially Rockwell's site) with some discussion. Highly recommended (just don't use it as the only site for feedback).

[Nic in Western NYS]

Check out dpreview.com for the skinny on those cameras. Excellent review process, less bias (especially Rockwell's site) with some discussion. Highly recommended (just don't use it as the only site for feedback).

Lots on that site, thanks.  Hopeful the equipment will be back in the saddle sometime soon.  The choice of camera body will not be easy though.

[AJ Huff]

I'm still using my first DSLR camera, an early model Canon Rebel.  It's hasn't moved me because of shutter delay.  I can't get the candids I want and its too frustrating overall for nature shots with moving animals.  I'm guessing that the newer DSLRs have fixed this problem with faster processing speeds - am I right on that?

(If anyone on this list wants a camera bag filled with beautiful Canon lenses and and AE-1 (film) camera, let me know.  I've been saving it for years because the lenses are so good I figured there would be a way to turn them into good digital astrophotography tools, but I haven't been able to do it.  Won't be free but pretty much for a song - want these to go to someone who can do them right.)

When I was young, spent a lot of time in the darkroom and was really into photography.  Now I use the phone- maybe the next phone will be chosen based on the camera.  I just don't carry anything around other than wallet and phone these days. Great thread!

If you do decide to unload them, PM me a price.

-AJ