You ever wander away as a young tot?

This is why I so enjoy my nature photography experiences. After I've captured the animal's pose and the experience and adventure, everything returns to the exact condition that it was prior to my visit. I'm just extremely lucky that I don't need to catch my dinner to survive.

There ya go. I put down my guns and picked up a camera several years ago. It's still hunting, but without the killing.

That's a mighty fine image. Good for you! I'm sure many others would agree. (BTW, I notice those buzzing flies, too.)

Danke. Better than an image of it being skinned or mounted, for sure. Yeah, the flies surprised me. I didn't see them until I got the image on a monitor. That was a Nikon D90. One of my early efforts with it. Moved on to a D800E a couple of years ago. Wonder what it would've done with those flies.

My guess is if the image were taken with that D800E, you'd be able to count the eyes on the flies.

You and I are in the same digital camera family. I have been in that family for 20 yrs or more.

My partial list of camera choices of equip't goes back to N90 (AF, but not digital). Went digital more recently to the Nikon D100 (around 2000)..and then even more recently, got a gently used D700 at Xmastime.

Looked closely at Nikon D800E but it was a bit too dear for my budget but it would've been my choice had budget allowed. If my income this year from photography warrants it, it'll be my next used purchase.

I do understand that. This photography thing has pretty much cost me any reasonable degree of comfort in my retirement. I should have my head examined. I have yet to make a dime from any of my images. Lots of good times, but at a dear price....ugg.

Im a Canon guy because its a camera that is intuitive (like the diff between apple stuff and windows).
I picked up Canons and started shooting at day 1 and the features were easily learnt. (I still dont like the idea of Video, My D60 has some allowable inputs to insert "customizing features " (Like layers in which I can bifurcate two different color schemes)

Still, I see all these Canon v Nikon things becoming moot. Small digital (non SLR)cameras are now dinosaurs Phones are no longer phones with attached cameras, they are cameras with attached phones. There are 1 or 2 cameras with 40 megapixel density and really good optics nd zooms.

PS, I used the LYNDA schooling nd have gotten a really good backing for Photoshop elements an Now Im beginning to ascend the Photoshop university. (its a time consuming learning curve but my notes are better than those "Dummy" books.

I undertand the new i watch will have at least a 20 meg camera (The only problem Ive seen the "Experts" tlk about is the briefcase sized batteries.

I hear 'ya there. I have had the camera bug for 35 years, spending some time in photo retail selling cameras and camera products. A comfy retirement has long been a foregone conclusion.

In the very immediate future, I hope to recoup some of these funds and make some small money attempting to sell some of my images. I've been sniffing around this for 15 years. Nowadays it has become easier to do with self-publishing and self-marketing online with websites, etc. Luckily, I've got an artistic eye as well as decent technique but what it takes to sell is showing, making opportunities, and a bit of salesmanship, which I do have.

Some recent images are posted on FB for those who are interested.

I started with my father's Argus. (Ok, I had a Brownie and an early Instamatic before I learned to use that, but hey.) I rue the Argus was stolen in the seventies. I'm a nikon person whose last camera has been a canon digital, but I've lost my photographing pep for now.

I recall you're telling me about when you purchased your last DLSR. Canon made the most sense for you and to you.

Intuitive use can be a subjective choice, depending on your familiarity with interfaces and familiarity with models of Nikon vs Canon and/or a particular camera line. I like Canon's menus a bit better (user friendly) than I do Nikon's, in general, as they've better programmers and do more consumer research, IMHO.


The issue is hardly a moot one when you are already knee-deep in Nikon lenses, accessories, and flashes when you are making a decision to do an upgrade. It would have cost me thousands to switch brands, as is the case for millions of others of pro-sumers who are knee-deep in one brand's total camera line

However, when I used to sell camera eqip't in a retail store and the consumer had no equip't at all or getting rid of ancient and/or useless gear, I would suggest for them to check out the camera menus of Canon Vs Nikon and see which camera fits their hand sizes and which one appealed to their own logic of where the buttons/switches and whatnot are.

its generational. I dont think photography by phone is done by folks who will build a blind and wait for bluebirds to show up and gang stuff a irdhouse in winter, or wait in a wet bog for key deer to show up.

They mostly make selfies and pictures of cats

I tell ya though. Im hooked on all lenses with that steddy cam gizmo built in. It makes shooting on the fly a lot clearer (unless you want to shoot to get the sense of movement.

As for smart phone cameras ..they are great for snap shots and occasional portrait. It's meant for convenience and quick distribution; however, when it comes to any serious imagemaking and/or close up work, they just can't cut the mustard.

That wasn't the intent for their use. I've played with many images from IPhone5 and gotten some decent results when diddled around in Photoshop or simple image editing software.

Yup, amen to that.

I so have the capacity to do video on my Nikon DSLR, but I never use it. I do let my IPhone 5 do the dirty-work..for short 30 sec or less video 'note-taking'

I think what steadycam lenses have built-in them is a vibration-reduction technology. I know that Canon lenses do this well.

However, some camera bodies, like Nikon (I think), has the steadycam or vibration reduction capability built into the body. This approach would be convenient as it wouldn't matter what lens you would have mounted.

{Edit : (I'm wrong ...some Nikon lenses have lens with steadycam..not in their bodies. It's Sony and Pentax that do it within the camera body}

Personally, I have no Nikon camera or lenses that has that capability, but I understand they also have the tech, too. I think Nikon approach is to put it in the body itself.

I agree...re serious nature shooters. The usage is like comparing Apples (pun intended) and pizza.

The old Argus cams were a nifty camera. Even the now almost-defunct Kodak in the early- to mid-'50 thru the early 70s had a great rangefinder camera. Kodak Retina II and Retina IIIc (made in Stuttgart Germany) were classic...not quite Leica level but good.

I ranged far, but always with-in the rules so far as I remember. I suspect in the case given that the kid is never allowed to go anywhere alone, so rules were never even given much less enforced, which is bad parenting in my books. Kids should always be given freedom in a controlled setting, and then more as they earn it.

Speaking or ranging far and range-finders...One of the most popular is/was Argus C3 (the brick). (Notice the nearly seamless segue?)

I think you're quite wrong.

I'm seeing some very good phone camera work being done by the younger generation of biologists and environmental scientists. Award-winning in some cases.

They are standing in rivers for hours with their phones and getting great captures of fish and birds and slithery things. I'm genuinely impressed by some of their work.