I visited on of the our local game reserves yesterday.

Took some photos.

Blue Wildebeest




Blesbuck




Impala









Plains Zebra



Hippo


Warthog


Eland


Greater Kudu






Fiscal Flycatcher


Yellow Billed Ducks


Cape Shoveler


Blacksmith lapwing (plover)


Golden Orb Spider








Who wants to come on a photo safari ???

Thanks, Gerhard !!

Nice pics. Thanks for showing them.

You know your a photographer when the first thing that comes to mind is Depth of field
rather than Kentucky Windage.

Thank you...

The small digital did not bad at all.

Maybe one day I can afford a high end camera. Now that would be fun to play with...

Only get in to the photo gear arms race, if you need to do really big prints. Or your getting payed for your pics.
It's way better to use a simple camera well, than carry something that you never really come to grips with.
Like "Beware the man with only one gun ...
he probably knows how to use it real well."

quote:

Originally posted by The Specialist:
Only get in to the photo gear arms race, if you need to do really big prints. Or your getting payed for your pics.
It's way better to use a simple camera well, than carry something that you never really come to grips with.
Like "Beware the man with only one gun ...
he probably knows how to use it real well."

Good advice ....

Thank you.

i use a great camera called the Lumix DMC LX3. it is a great compact camera and takes photos worthy of a SLR.
check out some of my photos for proof. here's a link : Tanzania Hunt Series.

hope you enjoy

quote:

Originally posted by Gerhard.Delport:
Thank you...

The small digital did not bad at all.

Maybe one day I can afford a high end camera. Now that would be fun to play with...

Neat shots. I wished I'd have gotten more images while on my hunt, but then again I was hunting not picture taking. And then when I did have the chance for some photos, I screwed up and didn't use the RAW setting.

There are some used digital SLR's for sale at www.adorama.com and www.bhphoto.com. I have a Canon 20D (for sale, used, for about $325 USD) that I use with high end Canon lenses. I'm looking to pick up another digital SLR and am seriously considering these used models. Other than the shutter, I don't suppose that there is much that can go wrong if the camera wasn't abused.

quote:

Originally posted by The Specialist:
Only get in to the photo gear arms race, if you need to do really big prints. Or your getting payed for your pics.

While in general I agree with you I found out something really interesting. For years I used a Hasselblad 500CM and SWC/M with short and medium zeiss fixed lenses with strange names. I got to appreciate really creamy lenses and what a 6x6 Transparency could do.

Then comes the F-5 and D1X. Thats when I found that Nikon made 4 or 5 quality levels of lense. It wasn't until I looked at their top of the line offerings did I find a lense that produced digital images anywhere close to the zeiss.



These are used for industrial photography and not animals.

Nice ...
My girl did just catch me on a Hasselblad website. She went OH that's just like the camera that Tyra was using on America's Next Top Model.
YES I replied ... Maybe I should get one?
Then she noticed the price ... bugger.

quote:

Originally posted by The Specialist:
Nice ...
My girl did just catch me on a Hasselblad website. She went OH that's just like the camera that Tyra was using on America's Next Top Model.
YES I replied ... Maybe I should get one?
Then she noticed the price ... bugger.

Not uncommon, but superfun. The old joke I got a Hasselblad for my wife. I consider it a fair trade. Today digital Blads are available at third going on fourth generation. Here is picture of 31 meg H3DII. New HD4-60 will be at 60 meg, 16 bit. Cost not given. Don't know if it buys you anything, but Hassys drive the Japs nuts when you carry one around a show instead of one of theirs. These puppys are except in limited circumstances which include very large prints, etc. not practical but exciting technology.

Yes, the photo equipment arms race is here, and it's serious. I think most of us want to be able to put really sharp and clear photos online, or in our blogs (do you have one?) or for slide shows on tv's or the computer. I'm just starting to learn that an image on internet, which will usually have 800 to 1024 pixels on its longest dimension, doesn't look sharp and clear because it started out as 4000+ pixels on its longest side photo out of the camera. The lenses count, and the software and software user count even more.

Photo from my D90, downsized for internet.



Same photo "fixed" by a fellow AR member for this site:

Very nice! You sure did see a lot in a day!

One of the things I really liked about the 6x6 negative in the Hasselblad with zeiss glass was the ability to crop it and still get a decent sized negative field to play with.

Sense that having a large sensor with lots of pixels in combination with D ED lenses or other mfgr equivelent gives the same benefit.

This ability to crop is something that you get used to.

Polaroid offered a 20x24 View Camera, but availibility of film for the device is in doubt. 800mm lense is considered normal. Cost was reportedly $1500 per day + $75 per shot. Fun stuff.



There was a gentleman a few years ago who went around the desert photographing various distinquished Arabs in their tents with this puppy. They apparently loved it to death.