Newbie Frustrated over camera controls

[bikinchris]

My point was simple. If you are going to tear your hair out over 8 ounces, then don't bring the camera at all. If you want to take photos and want good ones, then it shouldn't be a problem to carry a better quality camera.

Certainly, if taking pictures is not a priority, then that is a
viable option. But given that the original poster clearly wants to
take pictures, what is the point of your post?

Dave
--
http://www.pbase.com/dsjtecserv

--
Chris, Broussard, LA

 

[bikinchris]

Meter= sunny 16 rule. the film box has recommended exposure settings for cloudy weather and shade too.

So looking for a better camera, Ive been reading up on the Panasonic
LX3, but reading the manual ahh, am I missing something here. Whats
wrong with a dial switch for exposure, a dial switch for sensitivity
a dial for aperture, stepped control for zoom so you can set the
focal length to whatever dimension you wish, and all work
independently and all immediately accessible.

Like this one?

What do you guys think?
--

Sorry, couldn't resist
--

But, does it have face detection? Or a meter?

--
Chris, Broussard, LA

 

[dsjtecserv]

My point was simple. If you are going to tear your hair out over 8
ounces, then don't bring the camera at all. If you want to take
photos and want good ones, then it shouldn't be a problem to carry a
better quality camera.
--
Chris, Broussard, LA

Well, thank you for sharing, Chris. Accomplished backapackers do indeed tear their hair out (as you put it) over 8 ounces, and strive to find ways to serve the needs of safety, enjoyment and (if it's a priority for the individual) photographic expression while backpacking. Since that isn't your interest, I guess you shouldn't be expected to share or appreciate that challenge. But of course, you didn't really add anything constructive to the discussion either, which is unfortunate.

Dave
--
http://www.pbase.com/dsjtecserv

 

[bikinchris]

So I just want to understand. So you are saying that all of the high end backpackers are down to about a slightly unhealthy 12% body fat? That they shorten their belts and the straps on their backpack for weight savings by cutting them? Titanium buttons and zippers? (I know they make titanium silverware and pots) Take a hack saw to all of the stays and brackets on the backpack? Drill holes through the carbon fiber backpack frame? I wonder if they know the cyclist's trick of what a big cup of coffee does for weight savings before a big climb. At least they sound like cyclists. Replacing all the bolts on their bicycle with $300.00 worth of Ti parts if they aren't Ti already. Ceramic bearings for the weight savings. Or lose a little more weight. But that won't work for Tour de France riders, since they are at about 7% body fat. We regular guy cyclists call the club guys who buy the super light (stupid light) bikies and replace weight weenies. They could save more weigth by spitting before the race.

I don't mean to sound like I am putting them down. I just find it amusing (because I am so heavy myself). As well as your condescending attitude like I am stupid. Hire a sherpa maybe? That would be the only choice for me, since I have nearly 240 pounds of lean body mass. I would be over my BMI if I had NO body fat. That is why I don't worry about equipment weight.
I guess the very idea of a DSLR should never have been breached.

My point was simple. If you are going to tear your hair out over 8
ounces, then don't bring the camera at all. If you want to take
photos and want good ones, then it shouldn't be a problem to carry a
better quality camera.
--
Chris, Broussard, LA

Well, thank you for sharing, Chris. Accomplished backapackers do
indeed tear their hair out (as you put it) over 8 ounces, and strive
to find ways to serve the needs of safety, enjoyment and (if it's a
priority for the individual) photographic expression while
backpacking. Since that isn't your interest, I guess you shouldn't be
expected to share or appreciate that challenge. But of course, you
didn't really add anything constructive to the discussion either,
which is unfortunate.

Dave
--
http://www.pbase.com/dsjtecserv

--
Chris, Broussard, LA

 

[dsjtecserv]

So I just want to understand. So you are saying that all of the high
end backpackers are down to about a slightly unhealthy 12% body fat?
That they shorten their belts and the straps on their backpack for
weight savings by cutting them? Titanium buttons and zippers? (I know
they make titanium silverware and pots) Take a hack saw to all of the
stays and brackets on the backpack? Drill holes through the carbon
fiber backpack frame? I wonder if they know the cyclist's trick of
what a big cup of coffee does for weight savings before a big climb.
At least they sound like cyclists. Replacing all the bolts on their
bicycle with $300.00 worth of Ti parts if they aren't Ti already.
Ceramic bearings for the weight savings. Or lose a little more
weight. But that won't work for Tour de France riders, since they are
at about 7% body fat. We regular guy cyclists call the club guys who
buy the super light (stupid light) bikies and replace weight weenies.
They could save more weigth by spitting before the race.

I don't mean to sound like I am putting them down.

I'm afraid you aren't succeeding. You comment was a straightforward, snarky put-down. It was inappropriate, particularly in the Beginner's forum. The original post was a sincere request for help from someone who obviously wants to take good pictures in the backcountry, consistent with a lightweight ethic. Your sarcastic comment had no other purpose than to ridicule his request, and you've accelerated that in this message. Whatever the background for your prejudices, they are out of place in this discussion.

I just find it

amusing (because I am so heavy myself). As well as your condescending
attitude like I am stupid. Hire a sherpa maybe? That would be the
only choice for me, since I have nearly 240 pounds of lean body mass.
I would be over my BMI if I had NO body fat. That is why I don't
worry about equipment weight.

No one has attacked you or disparaged you for the choices you've made. You might consider showing others the same respect.

I guess the very idea of a DSLR should never have been breached.

Dave

--
http://www.pbase.com/dsjtecserv

 

[bikinchris]

You and I are not connecting. I can see that everything I write is going to be misconstrued. I will now leave, since you intend to make me the bad guy. I apologise to you.

So I just want to understand. So you are saying that all of the high
end backpackers are down to about a slightly unhealthy 12% body fat?
That they shorten their belts and the straps on their backpack for
weight savings by cutting them? Titanium buttons and zippers? (I know
they make titanium silverware and pots) Take a hack saw to all of the
stays and brackets on the backpack? Drill holes through the carbon
fiber backpack frame? I wonder if they know the cyclist's trick of
what a big cup of coffee does for weight savings before a big climb.
At least they sound like cyclists. Replacing all the bolts on their
bicycle with $300.00 worth of Ti parts if they aren't Ti already.
Ceramic bearings for the weight savings. Or lose a little more
weight. But that won't work for Tour de France riders, since they are
at about 7% body fat. We regular guy cyclists call the club guys who
buy the super light (stupid light) bikies and replace weight weenies.
They could save more weigth by spitting before the race.

I don't mean to sound like I am putting them down.

I'm afraid you aren't succeeding. You comment was a straightforward,
snarky put-down. It was inappropriate, particularly in the Beginner's
forum. The original post was a sincere request for help from someone
who obviously wants to take good pictures in the backcountry,
consistent with a lightweight ethic. Your sarcastic comment had no
other purpose than to ridicule his request, and you've accelerated
that in this message. Whatever the background for your prejudices,
they are out of place in this discussion.

I just find it

amusing (because I am so heavy myself). As well as your condescending
attitude like I am stupid. Hire a sherpa maybe? That would be the
only choice for me, since I have nearly 240 pounds of lean body mass.
I would be over my BMI if I had NO body fat. That is why I don't
worry about equipment weight.

No one has attacked you or disparaged you for the choices you've
made. You might consider showing others the same respect.

I guess the very idea of a DSLR should never have been breached.

Dave

--
http://www.pbase.com/dsjtecserv

--
Chris, Broussard, LA

 

[Ringwraith69]

The FX-30 could very well be a good camera in it's class, I don't know it so I can't judge it. However: is seems to me that to fullfill your photographic wishes you might really need a camera that does give you more and easier control over it's parameters.

The suggestion of taking a photography class was a very good one. An equally good tip was to have a look at the Ricoh line up. Both the GX-200 ánd the GR Digital II are offer you D-SLR levels of control, a very high optical quality and a small light weight package. Might just be the way to go for you.

Good luck,
Peter

--
'We are only immortal for a limited time'

 

[john9001]

So looking for a better camera, Ive been reading up on the Panasonic
LX3, but reading the manual ahh, am I missing something here. Whats
wrong with a dial switch for exposure, a dial switch for sensitivity
a dial for aperture, stepped control for zoom so you can set the
focal length to whatever dimension you wish, and all work
independently and all immediately accessible.

Like this one?

wow, i have heard about those cameras, they have a replaceable sensor, right?

 

[dsjtecserv]

wow, i have heard about those cameras, they have a replaceable
sensor, right?
--

Yes, that's correct. The image recording medium, which is referred to by the technical term "filum" is replaced after every picture. This virtually eliminates the dust issues that plague the "sensors" that are typical of current, conventional technology. Because a fresh recording surface is presented for each picture, there is no risk of the sensor failing and rendering the camera useless. Most users also report that this technology virtually eliminates sensor noise. Just think -- no more worrying about whether the pixel density of your sensor is too big or too small!

The technology also permits substitution of recording media with different characteristics, although this can only be done every 24 or 36 pictures. This way you are not locked into the sensor that came with the camera. For instance, you can not only obtain media in different ISO sensitivities, but with different color rendering schemes, some better for landscapes and some for skin tones. One variety, going by the name of "Aivlev" is reputed to provide rich colors and saturation heretofore available only through extensive manipulation in Photoshop or with expensive plugins.

Versions are available to create either negative images, which are good for making prints, or positives, called "transparencies", that can be projected to a whole room without a computer. There is also a wide variety of filums that create monochrome ("black and white") images directly in the camera, eliminating the need to strip the colors in post-processing and avoiding the wasteful accumulation of excess colors in your computer.

The primary downside if this technology is that processing time can be a bit longer than with current cameras. While most advanced users consider this to be a minor inconvenience compared to the benefits of this exciting medium, there are rumors that a new startup company known as "Dioralop" has come up with a solution for this and will be able to make images instantly available.

A package with a continuous recording surface capable of recording up to 36 images is available for only a few dollars. If desired, all image processing can be done at central processing facilities, eliminating the need for tedious culling and computer processing by the photographer. Convenient drop off points are located everywhere, even in drug stores!

It's too soon to tell whether this new breed of camera and revolutionary recording medium will take over the market from established digital technology, but it would almost certainly take years. You may want to try it out, but don't ditch your digital equipment quite yet. Canon as yet has only one SLR that uses filum, and Nikon has two. Both are being very quiet about their plans in this area. Most retailers and online storefronts devote a small corner of their space to cameras that use filum, but the more people ask for it the more variety they'll stock.

Hope this piques your interest...

George Westman

--
http://www.pbase.com/dsjtecserv

 

[Lechero]

wow, i have heard about those cameras, they have a replaceable
sensor, right?
--

Hope this piques your interest...

George Westman

Nonsense! that thing will never replace a painting.

Eduardo

 

[bugzie]

If an expert used your FX30, they would concentrate on subject and composition. They wouldn't fiddle with the settings much because they would know this type of camera's limitations.

Take your FX30 when you want to travel light and concentrate on developing your "eye".

Use your D40 to learn the basics of camera control and what the settings mean.

 

[bikinchris]

Yes, that's correct. The image recording medium, which is referred to
by the technical term "filum" is replaced after every picture. This
virtually eliminates the dust issues that plague the "sensors" that
are typical of current, conventional technology. Because a fresh
recording surface is presented for each picture, there is no risk of
the sensor failing and rendering the camera useless. Most users also
report that this technology virtually eliminates sensor noise. Just
think -- no more worrying about whether the pixel density of your
sensor is too big or too small!

I was going to let this stand because you have been hypercritical of me, but it should be said that dust was a large problem in the days of film. One peice of dust can ruin an entire roll of film. Darkrooms were constantly fighting dust also.
Just to let the beginners know.
--
Chris, Broussard, LA