Hi,
I am looking for some how-to guides or ideas for taking digital photos of my furniture for a website gallery. Suggestions?
Bob
Discussion Forum
Get It All!
UNLIMITED Membership is like taking a master class in woodworking for less than $10 a month.
Start Your Free TrialCategories
Discussion Forum
Digital Plans Library
Member exclusive! – Plans for everyone – from beginners to experts – right at your fingertips.
Highlights
-
Shape Your Skills
when you sign up for our emails
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. -
Shop Talk Live Podcast -
Our favorite articles and videos -
E-Learning Courses from Fine Woodworking
-
-
Replies
Rob Millard wrote a nice article on this in the American Period Furniture journal put out by the Society of American Period Furniture Makers (SAPFM) in 2004. You can purhcase it from their website, or maybe he would send you a reprint.
Jay
Bob,
By an odd coincidence, I'm preparing to update my website between Christmas and New Years, and one of the new articles will be an expanded version of my SAPFM article. Below I condensed the article.
It takes quite a bit of light to get the proper exposure on furniture. I use 2 Smith Victor lights with 500 watt tungsten bulbs, but halogen construction lights would work just as well. Film cameras require white balanced light, but digital cameras can either have a preset white balance, programmed in to work in nearly any light, or an editing program can correct a color cast. I sometimes use umbrellas to bounce the light, but my shop has a fairly low ceiling so I usually just bounce the light off it. low slung furniture often needs an additional light(s), to eliminate/lessen a shadow under it. 99% of the time I do this with a light suspended above and behind the piece so it shines on the background material.
There are several types of background material. Muslin (pretty expensive) Canvas ( can be very expensive) or paper (cheap). I use paper in a neutral light gray, which also works as an aids with the white balance. I like a neutral background to place the focus on the piece of furniture, but I see many pleasing photos with vibrant backgrounds, so this depends on your taste.
Digital cameras change so quickly, that what was available on only high end cameras a few years ago is common on inexpensive cameras today. I paid $450 for a 1.2 MP camera in 2001 that could barely make photos good enough for the web. Today for about the same price I can get a Nikon D-40 that will take print quality photos. The things to look for in a camera is the ability to control the aperture setting, at least 3 MP, a built in timer and that it will accept filters. I like to use a small aperture so there is sufficient depth of field, so all parts of the furniture are in focus (or nearly so). Using a polarizing filter will control the reflection from polished surfaces. The final thing you need is a good tripod, one matched to the weight of your camera.
I have attached a photo of a photo set up.
If you have any questions, I'll try to help
Rob Millard
http://www.americanfederalperiod.com
Let me chime in here: I'm a commercial photographer and spent years working in a studio lighting objects like furniture and other items.
What you've suggested is a reasonable, low cost setup. And it should work reasonably well for this purpose. Looking at your setup, I see one thing I'd recommend changing though. Your small tripod, with its center section extended to its limit, will provide wobbly support for the camera.
Shooting at low light levels, as this type of setup would provide, you'll need a slow shutter speed (unless you jack up the ISO rating, which will result in more digital "noise" in the photo). A wobbly tripod and a slow shutter speed will give you soft (out of focus) photos, due to camera movement. A higher end, taller tripod is a good investment, and not that much more than a small one like the model pictured here. It's best to have no center post extension at all, or minimal extension if you can't avoid it altogether. Also, fewer leg sections mean a more rigid unit.
You can use the self timer on the camera in order to give it time to settle down on the tripod after you've depressed the release button. 5 seconds should be long enough, though ten is better. Also, avoid walking or moving around after you've released the shutter. Springy floors can cause camera bounce, again resulting in soft images.
One of the many advantages to shooting digital is that you can instantly see exactly what the camera recorded on the LCD in back. If you don't like how the photo has turned out, you can change the lighting, change the shutter speed, change the f-stop. It's a great advantage over having to wait days for your photos to come back from the lab...
Zolton* Some people say I have a problem because I drink hydraulic brake fluid. But I can stop any time I want.
The tripod is a Bogen/Manfrotto and is rated for a much heaver camera than I'm actually using. I often use it with my 300mm f 4 lens and get very sharp photos. Its true, that a heavy duty tripod is a good investment, but I've been completely satisfied with this one.
I set the timer to 5 seconds and since I'm working on a concrete slab, vibration from moving about isn't a concern. The D-70 has a remote control, and I use this on occasion to trip the shutter. On my D-100, I could lock the mirror and eliminate mirror shock, the D-70 lacked that feature, but I worked to find a "sweet spot" with the shutter speed that gave me a clear photo with sufficient depth of field. I only shoot at the lowest ISO number to avoid a lot of digital noise; this was even more important when I used the D-100, due to its high noise curve. I want to a get a later generation digital SLR ( D-200 or the D-300) because of the better noise parameter (not so much for the furniture, but my out and about photography).
I started photographing my furniture just as digital was coming to the consumer market, but I was still using a film camera, and as you said that wait while the film was being processed, was a pain, but it forced me to look at a subject and develop (pardon the pun) a sense of the lighting, f stops, etc. Still, some of those photos were very poor, mostly because of the background choice and the rudimentary conversion from negative to digital format I used. When I update my website the less than satisfactory photo will go, or I'll try to scan and tweak them in Photoshop.
Rob Millard
http://www.americanfederalperiod.com
Thank you for all the information you have provided.I have never been able to take a reasonable quality picture of furniture. Inside or even outside (shade or sun).I have a Olympus C-4000 and I can take good quality pictures of people and places but furniture is a different matter. Especially if it is glossy. From reading your post I guess it is time I READ THE MANUAL and then try to figure out what all the million or so settings do!
Rob and Zolton, What lens would you recommend for shooting with lights? I have from 10-20' distance available with my setup now. I'm trying to upgrade my photos and going to upgrade from a Canon point and shoot to a Nikon DSLR. Right now I'm going back and forth between a D40 and a D80. I'm going to try to attach one of my latest pics. The local camera store didn't have the gray paper so I've been using white. I still want to get gray and black.Any tips would be beneficial to myself and others I'm sure.EarlFurniture...the Art of a FurnitureMaker
Earl,
Very well rendered indeed! You need little advice from me.
However, if you're moving up to a DSLR - Nikon especially - that's a line I have invested in, and maybe I could suggest a lens or two. I only buy pro lenses though, and many people (my wife included) think it's insane to pay upwards of $1,500 for a lens. But they do certain things very well, and I need them to do my work. So..
Keep in mind that both the D40, D40X and D80 are what are called "DX" sensor cameras. They've got a smaller sized sensor than 35 mm film. Therefore, they exhibit what many people call a "crop factor." Without getting into a lot of complicated explanation, it simply means that lenses you might be familar with used on a 35mm film camera will now provide more "reach." Specifically, a 100mm lens will show the same field of view as a 150. A 24 will behave like a 36mm and so on. You multiply by 1.5 the focal length of the lens in order to determine what the crop factor is for that lens (when used on a DX camera).
Anyway, this all boils down to the fact that you might need a wider angle lens than what you might assume at first, though with 10-20 feet of distance between you and the object you're shooting, it might not be a major limiting factor.
I owned a Nikon 24-85 zoom a few years ago before I sold it. Overall, it's a very good lens. Very sharp, fast to focus, and pretty reasonably priced as these things go. I think I paid about $350.00 for it back then. I don't know what they're going for now. There are likely quite a few on the used market. Check with someplace like KEH Camera Brokers if you'd like to investigate that route.
The 24-85 is a variable aperture lens, which means the largest (widest) aperture changes as it is zoomed from one end of the focal length range to the other. That's kind of a deal killer for me - plus the fact that it is a "slow" lens to begin with (meaning the widest aperture available, at the 24mm end, is, I think, f3.5. That's too slow for my purposes. I need at least f2.8).
But for shooting things like furniture and kids, it's offers a very good focal length range. You might also look into a 17-55 if you'd like a bit more of a wide angle lens.
If you go to Nikon's website at nikonusa.com, you'll see a wide range of lenses that they make, and that might help you make a decision.
Good luck, Zolton* Some people say I have a problem because I drink hydraulic brake fluid. But I can stop any time I want.
Just wondering is anybody of y'all is doing perspective correction (I really mean perspective correction, a'la good old view camera, as opposed to [wide angle] lens distortion)? Looks like that is easily done in software these days, or is this something furniture photographers do not worry about any more.ThanksChrisChris Scholz
Atlanta, GA
Galoot-Tools
Chris,
I used to use a 4x5 back when I had my studio, but I sold it when I moved out of that place. I've got a 35mm PC (perspective control) lens for my DSLR's now, but almost never use it. It does shift the front lens element, but doesn't tilt. So, kind of limited for anything other than architectural type work, and it's also not the greatest optical quality...
You mentioned software fixes for perspective control, and that's what I use almost exclusively these days to correct distortion. There are several programs that do different things. One I have, PT Lens, has mapped most of the available lenses on the market for their optical characteristics, and runs corrections of photos taken with those lenses. As an example, it corrects the Nikon 12-24 wide angle zoom for barrel and pincushion distortions.
For converging vertical lines, say when photographing a building and pointing the camera up or down, I can either use PT Lens or Photoshop's Free Transform tool. There are other ways to go about it, but that's what I use because it's easy and quick to do. It's amazing to see a photograph pulled this way and that, yet still retaining great quality...
Zolton* Some people say I have a problem because I drink hydraulic brake fluid. But I can stop any time I want.
Zolton,
If I may, a few questions since you seem to have a good bit of camera knowledge.
I have decided to upgrade from a point and shoot to a digital SLR and after reading hundreds of reviews and listening to other people's suggestions, I have decided on the Nikon D40. It was between the D40 and D40X but after reading Ken Rockwell's article (thanks Rob Millard) I have decided to go with the D40.
Now here is my quandry - the lens nomenclature has me baffled so I want to make an informed decision before I spend the cash.
The D40 comes with either an 18-55 or 18-135 lens. I build a little furniture, but mostly kitchen cabinets (for a living). If I understand correctly the 18-135 lens (which is more expensive than the 18-55) has a wider field of view so being close in to the subject (like in a kitchen) where I can't get a lot of distance would this be the better choice?
Also, in your opinion, if I were to purchase the 55-200 telephoto (not for kitchens, obviously), would it be wise to get the lens with the VR (vibration reduction) feature - it's a bit more than the non-VR 55-200.
Any thoughts you have would be welcomed (and anyone else for that matter)
Thanks in advance,
Lee
Lee,
Good questions. For the telephoto lens, (I think you said it was a 55-200), VR (vibration reduction) or IS (which is what Canon has, I think, "Image Stabilization?"), would be a good feature to have. You don't need it much for the wide angle focal length of that zoom (the 55mm end). But it does come in very handy when handholding the camera when the lens is zoomed out to 200mm. It's not a substitute for sloppy camera holding practices - and you're best off mounting the camera on a tripod whenever it is possible to do so - but vibration reduction really does work to a certain extent. Just bear in mind that it does not "freeze" action. In other words, you're not going to be able to shoot a football game in low light using vibration reduction. VR or IS works on static, unmoving objects only.
As to the other zoom you're considering, either the 18-55 or the 18-150 (I think that's what you said) would give you the wide angle field of view to photograph kitchens. That's the 18mm end of the lens.
Generally speaking however, lenses with huge zoom ranges are often not of the quality of zooms with shorter ranges. So the one with the larger range might not be as sharp (and it likely won't be as fast) as the one with the shorter range.
To add to what another poster said about zoom lenses, and perhaps to slightly contradict his remarks, much research and development has gone into this type of lens in recent years, and what the major camera companies are turning out - in the more expensive models - is stellar. If there is any acuity falloff between these lenses and prime (fixed focal length) lenses, it is so slight as to not be important to the average user. Again though, I'm talking about upper end lenses - the Nikon 14-24 f2.8 that just hit the market a few weeks ago is said to be sharper at both ends than the primes it is designed to replace. Of course, it's $1,800...
With lower priced zooms, his statement is probably correct - good quality prime lenses are likely to be sharper than mid-quality zooms. However, again, unless you're a real pixel peeper, it may not be something you'd notice. For the versatility of a using a mid-priced zoom there is a (slight) price to pay in terms of optical quality.
Zolton* Some people say I have a problem because I drink hydraulic brake fluid. But I can stop any time I want.
Earl,
That's a perfect picture. With photos like that, you don't really need to up grade, if all you are doing is web based photos.
I use a Sigma 24-70 f 2.8 for my furniture shots. If they had been available when I purchased my lens, I might have went with one of the 12-24 lenses. I had a Nikon 24-120, that was fairly expensive, but it suffered from considerable distortion; fine for nature photos, but straight line stuff no way. I sold it for most of what I had in it. I think "real" photographers look down on the secondary market lens (such as Sigma, Tokina etc.), but I've been very happy with ones I have.
Below is a link to a website that might help you with your decision on the D-40 or the D-80.
http://www.kenrockwell.com
Rob Millard
http://www.americanfederalperiod.com
I use a canon 20d, which is canon's version of the nikon D70. Pretty sure both companies offer similar lenses. My advice lens wise is to avoid a zoom lens unless you can afford a pro quality lens. I have canon's "kit lens" 18-55mm which I've found to be very good despite its low price and the $500 17-85mm image stabilizing lens which I don't care for. In my opinion, neither lens produces high quality images. I much prefer the fixed length lenses. My favorite is a $79 50mm f/1.8. It produces some of the nicest images I've ever seen and is fast enough (low f/stop-large aperature) to capture pictures of my wiggly children. I also have a 60mm macro. The problem with these lenses is that my shop is small and I can't get far enough away to capture large pieces of furniture. What I think you really want is a 35mm lens or the like. If nikon has a cheap 50mm buy it. For furniture, try to get a wider lens. I'd avoid the zooms unless you are absolutely sure the lens is tack sharp. You don't need a fast lens for furniture. But you do need a good tripod. I too have a bogen 3011 I picked up on ebay for $50.I think the canon digital rebel is a particularly good deal. Its got the same guts as my camera for $400 less.Adam
Bob, I hope I haven't stepped on your toes or strayed off topic with my lens inquiry. Zolton, Rob and Adam, thanks for the suggestions. I have 2 lenses in mind for starters a Nikon 18-70 3.5/4.5g Ed-if A-fs-dx and a Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF Standard Auto Focus Nikkor Lens. I do a lot of commission pieces and sometimes there just isn't the time and flexibility to arrange for a professional to shoot the work. Of course that would be the best, excluding the cost involved. I don't know if I can attain the quality necessary, in Work and Photos, for high end shows like the Smithsonian and American Craft Expo, but that is my goal.EarlFurniture...the Art of a FurnitureMaker
...or as a much less expensive and very viable alternative to purchasing a decent WA lens, take two (or three or twenty) pictures and stitch them together which is easy enough to do with very potent free software.
As an added bonus this also increases the effective pixel count of your sensor which tends to make many photographers happy.Chris Scholz
Atlanta, GA
Galoot-Tools
That's a great idea. I've never tried that. With a hi res picture, do you get distortion? What sort of software do I need for that? I'm a macintosh pilot.Adam
Any panorama tool will do the trick. HuginOSX works for me, no problems with 0.6.1 under Leopard. I am sure there are others out there.
Of course you do get distortions, after all you project reality onto a two dimensional space using a limited set of discrete values, aka pixels. Panorama tools often (always?) give choices on what kind of distortion you prefer.Chris Scholz
Atlanta, GA
Galoot-Tools
Can you manually set the apature on a d40? thanks. Jimmy
Yes you can shoot manually with the I'D. As for zoom lens. Way back when (early 1990s) I did a relatively good test comparing my manual focus canon fix length lens, a 35mm,50mm and a 100mm vs my Canon EOS zoom lens (a 35-105)and there was very little difference in sharpness but if you were photography something flat like a painting for example you got more distortion with the zoom lens. The best results for that kind of thing came from a true macro lens like a Nikon 50mm or Canon 50mm macro. If you where to get really crazy serious try the Canon 40D with a 50mm Macro for your furniture photography or if you need a wide angle lens try Canons 24mm perspective control lens. Anyway I think you will be happy with the 40D
Agreed, IMHO, the Canon 50f2.5 macro is one of the sharpest, most linear, etc. lenses on the market today (Nikon, Pentax, etc. probably have similar lenses in their lineup). The "old-fashioned" mechanical design is way outdated (relatively speaking of course, late 1980's is not that old in woodworking terms...) but will not be an issue when you shoot stuff that does not move very fast, now if you'd shoot indoor basketball, you'd probably opt for the 1.2L...
Check out the stitching to get you an effective WA lens, certainly not an "instant gratification" setup, you can always add a WA later or maybe, oh horror, a 15mm fisheye (with some level of de-fishing, no I don't shoot furniture, but I never go used to the "journalistic" look of humans shot with ultra-wide angle lenses, YMMV).---
...if you where to get really crazy serious try the Canon 40D with a 50mm Macro for your furniture photography...
---Chris Scholz
Galoot-Tools
Your right that is a great lens I used one years ago when I was shooting film with an EOS-1 anyway have fun.Troy
Jimmy,
I don't know about the ability to set manual control of the D40. However, I'm pretty sure you can. You can check the specs at the http://www.nikonusa website to get all those details. I'd be surprised if you couldn't though. Even though the D-40 is a pretty low-priced camera, it's still very sophisticated.
Zolton* Some people say I have a problem because I drink hydraulic brake fluid. But I can stop any time I want.
Bad link..Try http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=2&productNr=25420
Zolton, Any tips on lighting, such as continuous versus strobes, and soft boxes versus umbrellas. Besides the economic factors are there advantages to one over the other. I've been to studiolighting.net and strobist and so far,most of the info on lighting I've found pertains more in the way of Portrait lighting rather than product. I'm sure there are techniques that overlap and benefit product shots as well.I hope anyone else with tips or questions will chime in.EarlFurniture...the Art of a FurnitureMaker
I recently made a lighting setup which is basically simple: 1. An overhead reflector made of foam-core sheets (Office Max); 45 degree angled sides and a 1 x 4 ridge with sockets for 3 - 100 Watt "near daylight bulbs from Home Depot.2. Two side reflectors of foam-core, sliced to make vertical, 36" high, half-round enclosures. Each also has 3 - 100 watt bulbs.3. The background is 8' wide photo-backdrop paper - I used white.4. The difficult task was getting the correct "white balance". I suspect that a digital camera is the only practical way to get there - otherwise the background is muddy. I shoot at the smallest f-stop available for maximum depth-of-field and use the digital equivalent of a cable release. Shoot after dark so no "daylight" is present.5. I rigged up a set of pulleys and haul the components to the roof of the garage when not in use.Frosty"I sometimes think we consider the good fortune of the early bird and overlook the bad fortune of the early worm." FDR - 1922
From your photos, it seems like you have a great set-up. However, I can not quite envision your set-up. Could you provide a photo of you homemade light set-up? Or how about a quick sketch of light set-up?
Thanks,
Rooms
The stuff is "hanging from the ceiling" right now. In a couple of days I will set up again to shoot a new project. Hope you can hang on that long.Frosty"I sometimes think we consider the good fortune of the early bird and overlook the bad fortune of the early worm." FDR - 1922
Earl,
Purchasing lighting (strobes or hot lights) and light modification equipment (umbrellas or light boxes) can burn through some serious money in a short amount of time. Plus, it's complicated to recommend what you'd need for your purposes; there are so many different ways to go with that subject.
To start, why don't you start by just bouncing lights, either strobes or continuous lighting, off the ceiling in the room where you're photographing the furniture? The idea of "soft" lighting is to make the light "source" as large as possible in relationship to the object you're trying to photograph. By bouncing a small light source, say a regular small flash unit, against a ceiling, you're in effect turning the entire ceiling into a giant softbox.
Of course the color of the ceiling matters. If you bounce light off a red ceiling you'll wind up with pink light on your object. But if the ceiling is white, it should render a pretty good color. And light temperature variations are pretty easily corrected these days in digital image editing programs like Photoshop or Photoshop Elements.
Avoid shining or flashing light from small sources directly on the object. That will create very harsh, dramatic shadows. You can also construct a lightweight frame using small diameter PVC water pipe and elbow fittings to hold a sheet or other light fabric in front of a small source of light. The larger sheet will spread out and diffuse the light, transforming the small light source into a much larger one.
Modifying the light in this manner takes away much of its illumitative value (lighting power, for lack of a better term), but you can mitigate that somewhat by moving the light modification device closer to the object - and that also has the effect of making the light source even larger in relation to the object being photographed.
This is just a very light skim over a very complicated subject! Zolton* Some people say I have a problem because I drink hydraulic brake, fluid. But I can stop any time I want.
Zolton, Frosty, Rob and all the others, Thanks for the informing discussion. I've lots of experimenting with lighting to do. I've absorbed the basics and some of the do's and don'ts. Now to put them to use and see what I can do. For those that enjoy photography I stumbled across this Photographer http://www.lifeographer.com whose portraits, to me, are more than just pictures. And anyone that has ever wanted to publish their own book, photo or story, check out http://www.blurb.com My wife just did a 1st yr book for our Granddaughter. We can't wait to see the finished product at Christmas.EarlFurniture...the Art of a FurnitureMaker
Earl
If yo go to Canadaian Woodworking's forum on thier web site, go o the forum about wooden planes or planes. There is a member there called Mike in Barrie, he is a pro photographer(sp?) you'l see his work on the site. He can help you out for sure.
Rob,
Where do you buy your paper that you use for the background?
Mike
I bought mine from B&H Photo. I think I also got a roll once from Adorama. Both places are big photograph supply stores, that advertise in every photography magazine.
It is made by a company called Savage, and comes in a huge assortment of colors and sizes.
Rob Millard
http://www.americanfederalperiod.com
Thanks Ron!
BTW I saw your shop in Pop Wood.. Very admirable.
Mike
Mike, You should be able to find that at one of the local camera stores.
Adorama has it in every color imaginable. Do a search on "background paper" at their site.
-Steve
The timing of this thread is perfect. I'm about to upgrade from my 6-yr-old Canon G3 (at 4 megapixels), and I've settled on either a Nikon D300 or a Canon 40D with the Canon EF-S 17-55/f2.8 IS lens - I'm leaning toward the latter. Has anyone here any experience with the Canon for taking furniture or architectural images?
I like both cameras, and will soon settle on one of them, because they have "live view" LCD screens, and they can also be setup to shoot wirelessly from my laptop. I also like the high pixels: Canon's 10.5-megapixels and Nikon's 12.5-megapixels. And I'd like high quality image stabilizing lenses, because I'm often forced to shoot without my Bogen Manfrotto tripod.
Like others, I need a fast, wide angle lens for architectural shots in cramped spaces, and a fast macro lens for closeups. For this reason, I think the Canon 40D fits the bill, because I can get both lenses and the body for about what I'd pay for the Nikon D300 and one Nikor lens. For web site photos (mine needs a SERIOUS rework), I think the difference in pixels is minor, and 10.5 will be perfectly fine.
All that said, I'd like some feedback. Wouldn't it be great if one of Taunton's, FWW's, or FHB's photographers could chime in. Knowledgeable woodworking editors do on how-to questions, and it'd be good if their photo people post their thoughts here, or - better yet - write an article.
Gary W
gwwoodworking.com
I don't really have an exact recommendation. I have the Nikon D-200 which is an excellent camera so for me I would obviously pick the D-300 (which I will probably upgrade to eventually). With that said since you already own a Canon and more familiar with Canon it would probably behoove you to stick with Canon. I know Canon makes excellent products and I am sure you would be perfectly happy. On all the forums you will run into the old Ford -vs- Chevy mentality which I don't 100% subscribe to (even though I am a Chevy guy :-) ). You will find that neither Canon or Nikon, or any other brand of camera is perfect, they all have their little caveats. Hope this helpsB.Kidd
You should be very happy with the Canon, I have used Canon products professionally for over 20 years and have always been pleased. The biggest down side for the 40D is that the image chip is physically smaller than a "full" frame camera like a Canon 5D so a lens that wide angle lens is not as wide on the 40D as it would be on a 5D. So just be aware of that. A friend of mine uses a 5D for architectural photography all the time and the images are superb. You will do great with the 40D just get wider lenses as far as the zoom lens Canon has you will not have an issue with sharpness but you might get a little bit more distortion with the lower priced lenses and they have a smaller aperture so low light photography is harder. I am biased but most of the pros I know use Canons these days
"I am biased but most of the pros I know use Canons these days"
I don't know about architecture, furniture, etc., but that certainly seems to be true among wildlife photographers. Canon users far outnumber Nikon users.
-Steve (5D)
Troy & captainkidd,
Thanks for your input. I've also been using Canon since my A1, which was accompanied by lots of lenses - all Canon glass. I settled on the G3, because it has a hot shoe, and because I could get "add-on" lenses for it, but alas my bag - sans camera - was stolen during a breakin. Now I want a DSLR for its flexibility and higher end features. However, I'm 1st a woodworker and 2nd an experienced, amateur photographer. Besides architectural shots, I enjoy taking the camera along on hikes for macro shots of nature, and of course people shots. For those, the 6.5-fps burst rate of the Canon will be great.
I might add that I like my architectural shots to be with natural light, and only maybe with a couple of simple fill lights, or - if I must - I'll rent a strobe or two.
Now, if only I could find a relatively inexpensive digital back for my 4x5 - ha, ha - yeah really.Gary W
gwwoodworking.com
Gary,
When you said the difference in the number of megapixels between Canon's 10 and Nikon's 12 are minor, you said a mouthful. A lot of people get hung up on megapixels and don't even really take the time to learn how to get the most from the cameras they already own.
Especially for website photos, megapixels are a very, very minor issue. Most of the photos you'd post on a website won't be over about 700 pixels wide, if that. And any amateur camera (even a point and shoot) is capable of producing something that will look decent on the web.
Of course there are other reasons to buy cameras than to post photos on the web. But here, too, people don't really need all the megapixels they're buying these days. And the larger files are much slower to process, especially if your computer isn't up to date.
For much of my sports promotional photography work, I've used a Nikon D2H for years. 4.1 megapixels, and that camera will produce stunning prints up to about 12x18 inches or so. My D200, before I sold it, had 10 megapixels, and from the images it produced I routinely would get athletic team photos enlarged to 3x6 feet that were incredibly detailed.
Your prospective choices in cameras are pretty good between the Canon and the Nikon you cited. You should also look at things like focusing speed, shutter lag time and ergonomic features too... Zolton* Some people say I have a problem because I drink hydraulic brake fluid. But I can stop any time I want.
Zolton,
Thanks for your input. I know you're correct regarding pixels, but I also want to shoot for prints I can hang in my shop office, and my G3 has worked wonders for both web postings and 8x10 printed images.
Both the D300 and 40D have a split second startup time, and I believe their focusing time is in the low milliseconds, and I believe shutter lag is also very short - 6.5-fps! I like the way it fits my hands, and Gary W
gwwoodworking.com
When I was DSLR shopping between Canon and Nikon, it came down to which one felt better in hand. For my hands, the Nikon fit better, and the controls seemed a bit more intuitive, but that will be different for everyone.Thew
I think Canon and Nikon are like that. If you are use to Canon Nikon's feel weird and vise-versa. I started out with Canons (F-1 and AE-1) and I was never comfortable with Nikon's. I had friends with the oppasite feelings. Take careTroy
Probably not what you want to hear but I'll say it anyhow:
Keep the G3 for a few more years, (or if you absolutely can't resist the temptation get yesteryear's DSRL from KEH; hate to say that but the 1DsMkIII will not make you a better photographer). The f1.2L-series lens will make not much of a difference either (probably the opposite), your'll shoot your furniture at medium apertures anyhow and pretty much any lens will do just fine for that purpose (maybe with exception of the really cheap pieces of glass, on the other hand people get all excited about the Holgas and the lensbabies, maybe your'll end up using a no-name lens that you smacked against the wall real hard).
Instead I'd recommend you invest in a few good strobes (alienbees are kind of popular amongst the folks I know), light modifiers and duct-tape Styrofoam, aluminum foil, black and white cardboard and such, and most importantly, learn how to use your gear.
It's kind of like woodworking, isn't it?ChrisChris Scholz
Atlanta, GA
Galoot-Tools
Thanks, Chris. I rent strobes when needed, but I prefer natural light shots, with a better ability to make white balance corrections, and a quicker on time and shutter lag. I disagree about using a faster lens, and thought I mentioned that I will use only Cannon glass. On top of that, I don't want to invest another dime on PowerShot G3 accessories, like a wide angle, so I'll be off to the camera store before the end of this year. I think I already know how to shoot photos, although I haven't been paid for one in over ten years. I must add, that I'm still learning digital photography, which - like woodworking, rarely does a day pass that I don't learn something new.
So, Chris, what do you do for a living? It looks like you make beautiful tools. Are you a photographer as well?Gary W
gwwoodworking.com
Gary, I started into digital with the G2, which was a pretty good place to start. Since then, I have had the S2, S3 and now S5 IS. Usually one of my family members after seeing my photos wanted to get a camera and were impress with my shots, and bought the old one for about a third less than what I gave, then I got the next new thing. I really like what they are packing into these cameras, and the smaller package than going to the DSLR camera. The S5 IS is up to 8 mp. and has most of the great features of the higher priced cameras for around $350. If you took the shots on your website with your G3, you will love using the S5 IS. After having lugged a SLR film camera with usually 3 lens around for years, I really like having the small package that these cameras offer without having to change lenses. By the way, I enjoyed your site. I really liked the wenge wall shelf unit, with the bare cedar etc. We probably share a taste for simplicity.
Keith,
Thanks for taking the time to write your message and advice. When my G3 camera gear, with converter lenses, was stolen, along with $6000 of woodworking tools & supplies, I missed the wide angle most (I had the camera with me). But I didn't want to replace that stuff, because I learned that that lens didn't produce the quality that my friend's Nikon DSLR could with a wide angle lens. I think a faster lens with better glass gives me more handheld shooting freedom. So I decided that I wanted a more advanced camera, having experienced some of the best during my film shooting days. And I want a good image stabilizing lens as well.
Now I can't afford a 1D, but I also wanted a magnesium body, because I'm hard on my cameras, and the 40D has the metal body. I know, I should treat my cameras with more respect, but I enjoy shooting in the shop as well as elsewhere, and dust is a real problem here. I think the 40D will be better about keeping it out than the G3. So that's another issue. BTW: I've got to replace my laptop, because dust has done its damage to the 3-yr-old machine. This time I'm building a dust-free box to house it on my desk.
And since this will be a business expense, it'll be a write off.
Have a great weekend.
Gary W
gwwoodworking.com
Edited 12/8/2007 12:27 pm by GaryW
a Canon 40D with the Canon EF-S 17-55/f2.8 IS lensI think I'd recommend against that lens.Depending on what you want to do with that lens. I usually think of zoom lenses as being primarily for folks who want to satnd in one spot, yet frame their shot with their lens. First, I usually go to where I need to stand. Second, you can crop pictures easily with your computer. For me, and I'm not a real photographer even though I shoot pictures for my magazine articles, zooms just aren't helpful and produce pictures not as sharp as normal lenses. For architectural shots, I don't find a fast lens to be advantageous. I want everythng in focus not just the window nearest me. So its all f/8 stuff. I take pictures inside dimly lit museums and historic homes. I was hoping an IS lens would help. That's not been my experience. I can't hold f/8 in Williamsburg. So I bought a monopod. The monopod is helpful, but I don't do too well with that either- especially in the museum where I have the camera pointed at some funny angle. I even bought a tilt head.So I think I'd like to try Canon's EF-S 10-22mm wide zoom. Or preferably the 20mm f2.8 (I have no idea how much this lens costs. I'm figuring it will be cheaper than the L version). If I were you, I'd spring for something like that and the cheap 50mm f/1.8.Its good to talk about photography here. I wish I asked here long ago. The digital photography forums seem to be dominated by guys shooting porno. Strangely enough, I've found some of their advice helpful as they have many of the same issues I do. They have lots of pictures. They need to get them on the internet quickly. They use CF lights like I do which are cooler and take less energy (doesn't blow the circuit in the hotel room). I prefer haolgens, but I can't work under them for hours without sweating. But I think super crisp details are not always good for them. I need that sharpness. And they don't prefer deep depth of fields. No need to make out the details of the painting screwed to the wall. And they also have huge budgets for camera gear. I think their specific needs can slant the prevailing wisdom of the photography discussion groups.I say skip the zoom lens.Adam
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled