Camera For Fish

[raptorrex]

dust on the glass not dust on the lens, you would not see dust on the lens. it would appear, as small diffuse areas on the pic, making the pic less sharp.

 

[-*-MicHAeL-*-]

dust on the glass not dust on the lens, you would not see dust on the lens. it would appear, as small diffuse areas on the pic, making the pic less sharp.

Ohh ok but its definetly aeration non the less. Like smithrc said they are two cameras with two different purposes that produce great picture.

 

[raptorrex]

dust on the glass not dust on the lens, you would not see dust on the lens. it would appear, as small diffuse areas on the pic, making the pic less sharp.

Ohh ok but its definetly aeration non the less. Like smithrc said they are two cameras with two different purposes that produce great picture.

lol as you wish, i only have 20 years of practices,with photography, and 13 years of interpreting photos with photoshop. so im still an newbie!

 

[LisaLQ]

Sorry for the Foz/Loz thing, like I said, I'm on new pks (oxycontin) and I'm a bit...erm...slow today.

 

[T1KARMANN]

dust on the glass not dust on the lens, you would not see dust on the lens. it would appear, as small diffuse areas on the pic, making the pic less sharp.

Ohh ok but its definetly aeration non the less. Like smithrc said they are two cameras with two different purposes that produce great picture.

lol as you wish, i only have 20 years of practices,with photography, and 13 years of interpreting photos with photoshop. so im still an newbie!

well if you have that much experiance then you will know that if i set the cheap oplynpus up on macro and took a picture of something slow moving like a shrimp then their wouldnt be much in it

lets see some shot of something else apart from macro on this cam then we can get some idear of whats its realy like

macro is easy and most cams produce good shots when using it

 

[-*-MicHAeL-*-]

Sorry for the Foz/Loz thing, like I said, I'm on new pks (oxycontin) and I'm a bit...erm...slow today.

Ohh sorry

 

[LisaLQ]

Dont apologise, I'm usually pretty slow without 'em

 

[raptorrex]

dust on the glass not dust on the lens, you would not see dust on the lens. it would appear, as small diffuse areas on the pic, making the pic less sharp.

Ohh ok but its definetly aeration non the less. Like smithrc said they are two cameras with two different purposes that produce great picture.

lol as you wish, i only have 20 years of practices,with photography, and 13 years of interpreting photos with photoshop. so im still an newbie!

well if you have that much experience then you will know that if i set the cheap oplynpus up on macro and took a picture of something slow moving like a shrimp then their wouldnt be much in it


lets see some shot of something else apart from macro on this cam then we can get some idea of whats its relay like

macro is easy and most cams produce good shots when using it

in fact macro is a very difficult art to learn, and use, as the depth of field gets so small it can be hard to make sharp pictures, it also, for the most part, needs flash, both to freeze the action and increase depth of field. using macro on an SLR is even more difficult, as the amount of light passed through the lens make focus difficult, and you need to stop down the lens, to ensure you have enough depth of field. the macro on modern af zooms, is not macro its just close focus. 1cm is into the true macro area, as such this is the first compact i've seen that goes there at this price. an SLR true macro lens will cost far more than the compact, and you still wont have a flash that will do the job so you will need that too. if you start going into extention rings, or bellows things get more fraught.

we were comparing the pics posted on this thread, not the genaral quality of the camera, indeed loz did say it was nothing special, in other areas. comparing the pics posted the Pentax wins hands down. which is where we started.

try this YOU post a picture that is as sharp as the ones by loz, something you have not yet done.

 

[T1KARMANN]

well i have nothing thats not been resized or in macro but for a cheaper cam than the one that goes under water i still feel i can get as good if not better pics without getting wet or stressing out my fish

sorry about all the dust behind the fish but like you said your the expert so it cant be airation

 

[raptorrex]

they are very nice pics, but sadly not sharp. still. in the end it depends on the standards you set for yourself. so what is sharp to you may not be up to it for me. still looks like the pentax wins hands down. but if there is a wedding in my tank ill give you a shout! I'm sure your gear looks great. we will go on forever here, we have different ideas of what cuts it, as do a lot of people who replied to this thread.

ps dont forget to wipe your tank down next time you do some shots lol

there must be something more to do than reviewing mediocre pics. I'm off to find it. see ya.

 

[T1KARMANN]

they are very nice pics, but sadly not sharp. still. in the end it depends on the standards you set for yourself. so what is sharp to you may not be up to it for me. still looks like the pentax wins hands down. but if there is a wedding in my tank ill give you a shout! I'm sure your gear looks great. we will go on forever here, we have different ideas of what cuts it, as do a lot of people who replied to this thread.

ps dont forget to wipe your tank down next time you do some shots lol

there must be something more to do than reviewing mediocre pics. I'm off to find it. see ya.

well all my shots were tank with a fast moving aro so to me they look great but i do have some eye problems at present so i will just have to take your word for it

as long as you are taking into consideration my pics are taken through an acrylic tank and mosy of the time the aro is more 26inchs away from the cam i think they are dam good

if you ever need any help telling the diffrence between a air bubble and dust give me a shout

 

[lozronz]

Thanks for everyones comments... Even if half of them are are addressed to Foz!

T1KARMANN I really don't understand where you are coming from, I have been nothing but complementory about your photo's. I would get it if you were being critical at least I could take something from that but you seem to think my photo's are ok, just that the camera you have never seen or used is crap!?

Being waterproof doesn't make it a gimmick, and the fact that it is virtually indestructable, dust and sand proof is pretty cool for me. It got great reviews on all of the sites I looked at, and without being pretentious, I'm not sure that your olympus would take a better quality macro because at best it will have a min macro distance of 5cms opposed to the Pentax's 1cm.

Why does my method of taking photos bug you so much? If you don't want to put your hands in the tank, don't buy the camera! I often have my hands in their anyway for replanting. It doesnt bother me. I don't chase the fish around with the camera by the way I put a couple of sinking pellets in and let them come to me, they are fairly curious anyway. You seem to be striving to let me know that you are a better photographer, which is fine you probably are, like I said I have been doing it a matter of days. I have never claimed to be any good at photograpy.

You do have a harder job than me to take photos of your fish, as you say, they are faster and shinier so well done for finding a method that combats this hurdle, and I really like your choice of fish and tank set up by the way. Most of my fish do not possess these traits so I don't have to worry about that, so we have both chose a camera and developed or are developing methods of photograpy which complement our fish.

If you have any advice, tips or even critisms they would be appreciated and taken on board, but just slating a camera you have never used seems a little futile.

I had a bash at taking photos of some of my faster moving or more timid fish to see how the camera coped, they are not that good but I will find a way to build on or change the method. It doesn't help that one of the tanks is full of tannins.

This one is particularily grainy but he so rarely comes out of hiding it was a fluke I caught him at all, nice colouring though isn't he.

 

[-*-MicHAeL-*-]

Great pics Foz

 

[lozronz]

Sorry for the Foz/Loz thing, like I said, I'm on new pks (oxycontin) and I'm a bit...erm...slow today.

No probs! Jeez! You must be some serious pain to be put on them, nothing too bad I hope. Careful with them they are strong and its quite easy to become dependant on them although you probably know all this.

 

[T1KARMANN]

im not digging at you

are all the picure taken with the cam in the water and how does it perform taking shot throw the tank glass