Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-02-2018, 05:46 PM   #46
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 28,184
I've said this before I think. My dad always was (is) into equipment. He however admits some of the best photos he saw made were made by an untrained 20-something on a brownie Hawkeye. They were black and white images of brownstones.

The eye wins over equipment nearly every time. Also this story adds to the point:. Nikon's 'Worst' and 'Best' Zoom Lenses Compared

07-02-2018, 06:22 PM - 1 Like   #47
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,130
QuoteOriginally posted by ffking Quote
I don't know if I'm just going through and end of mid life crisis, whether it's just the dilution effect so many images out there, or whether I'm just getting jaded - but I find fewer and fewer pictures on Flickr (I don't operate on instagram or others) that actually hold my attention.

One possible explanation is the number of training courses and many free YouTube How To videos, which tend to lead to everyone going to the same places and doing the same things - which is an issue, but I don't consciously do that, and I'm also finding my own images less interesting. ( )

I've also noticed that since being a regular browser of PF contributions, for better and worse, I've become much more kit aware.

What I am wondering is this: is modern kit so good that it's too easy to produce images that have an immediate impact, and does this too often stop us from going that bit further to produce something exceptional, meaningful - and memorable?

Any thoughts?
Honestly - my focus isn't on creating an "impact". I began taking photographs because I saw things changing, and I wanted to record what today looks like before tomorrow comes and everything changes. So, as long as I get an accurate rendition, I'm happy. A better rendition might make me happier, but I'm not willing to crush our budget to do that.
07-02-2018, 06:47 PM - 4 Likes   #48
amateur dirt farmer
Loyal Site Supporter
pepperberry farm's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: probably out in a field somewhere...
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 41,275
I am completely new to the digital SLR scene - prior to December '14, I had shot with mainly bridge cameras, point and shoots, and a bit of film, but without much interest in the art of it at all... I have no formal training or education in photography at all; everything I've learned has either been through these forums, online classes, or just trial and error...

when I bought my K-50, and later when my wife gave me a K-3, I found the potential in the moment of capture.... there is a moment of bliss, of near-rapture, when you are one with the camera and the image in your mind's eye is transferred to the camera...

I have no aspirations of fame or fortune here - I shoot entirely for myself and my own pleasure, hence some of the odd compositions/trials that I attempt to capture...

I've found a few things to be true in my short time with a DSLR in my hand: better gear never automatically equates to better shots - there has to be some effort/time/energy involved... better gear does, however, make it easier to capture snapshots or candid photos... but if I want to expose myself to the art of photography, I need to turn off the autofocus and get into the shot....

additionally, the gear can become an addiction if you let it; my LBA waxes & wanes and I'll go through turns of lusting after the next lens, followed by evaluating my current arsenal for the keepers and the nots...

for me, the better gear is what you make of it - sometimes, it makes the shot easier to capture, sometimes a great kit just gives you good snapshots...
07-03-2018, 03:24 AM - 6 Likes   #49
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27,606
I guess the thing about level of kit is that it can make it easier to achieve your vision. When I was shooting with a K7 I struggled often with the low dynamic range that sensor had and from the K5 on, that hasn't been an issue.

For me, the most rewarding part of photography has been taking photos of my kids -- capturing different parts of their lives -- our lives, together. They aren't great photos, but they stir something in me that great landscapes and images like that won't do.

I enjoy landscape photography as well, but for me, it is the journey to get the photograph that is as important as the photograph itself. The getting up early, going out into nature, into the quiet and just being there in the beauty. Sometimes I come away with something decent and sometimes not, but I always come away refreshed and that for me is a blessing, regardless of the kit I am using.

Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-1 Mark II  Photo 

Last edited by Rondec; 07-06-2018 at 02:45 AM.
07-03-2018, 06:18 AM - 1 Like   #50
Veteran Member
micromacro's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Florida
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,722
QuoteOriginally posted by ffking Quote
What I am wondering is this: is modern kit so good that it's too easy to produce images that have an immediate impact, and does this too often stop us from going that bit further to produce something exceptional, meaningful - and memorable?
Any thoughts?
I think the opposite, the modern kit is so good that it's too easy to produce technically great images, and count modern editing tools as well, but makes it more difficult to produce immediate impact. At the end it's all about light, composition, and the talent behind the camera, and I believe that will never change.
07-03-2018, 06:37 AM - 5 Likes   #51
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
It took me w while to wrap my head around the concept, hence my 4 page silence.

Personally I don't think great kit counts for squat. If you plan to sell your images as large scale prints, that is the one and only place great kit really counts. For 95% of photography average kit will do. My favourite example being the old wedding guy shooting a Canon 5D the original, 12MP camera when the D800 came out. Hw worked part time at Henry's and had access to every camera on the market, but he shot his 5D and saw no reason to change. I have never matched a few of the images I took with my 12 MP K-x or even 6 MP images from my original *ist D and K-100D. Photography is right place right time, or a really creative imagination setting up images. What gear you use is for the most part irrelevant if it is the best gear for the job.

I completely can't comprehend some of the above statements about APS-c and K-1s. I've done testing with shots I was sure would demonstrate the superiority of K-1 images, and my wife's K-5 images were just as good as my K-1 images for landscape, identical in fact. Instead of my post being "The K-1 advantage clearly demonstrated" the title became "Can you even tell which is which ?"

And when I'm out in the blind, I may be tempted from time to time to try the K-1, and I do, but it is brutal. The impossibly slow frame rate, the speed at which it fills the buffer, even with the really slow frame rate, the loss of reach and the loss of subject resolution, the loss of one stop of DoF for the same aperture for at best identical images.

So, my contribution to the topic is, I totally don't get it.

My whole response to the "You have to have great gear to get great images." is. "Pffft." Prove it. You may have to have great gear for getting some images, but the odds of an amateur actually knowing how to set up to make use of the resolution of a K-1 are pretty low. It's a small window and hoping you'll luck into getting a few fames that actually make the best use of your camera/lens combo are pretty low, no matter what you shoot. If you just do what everyone else does, high end gear won't separate you from the crowd. And imaginative informed shooting practices combined with almost any modern camera and lens combo will.

My studio instructor at Ryerson devoted a class to images he took with the 110 camera he kept in his glove box. He took the time to point out why they were more interesting than if he'd used a larger format. The lesson. Don't worship high end gear. Use the camera for what it's best at. And there isn't one camera that does everything.

If there's one easy lesson amateurs should know, in my opinion, that's it .Never feel you are shooting at a disadvantage. There is always something your $100 point and shoot or bridge camera is better at than the guy with $20,000 worth of gear's kit. It's advice many amateurs need. That feeling of inferiority because some dude has expensive gear he has no idea how to make use of is a big detriment to beginners, who end up thinking about what they don't have, rather than understanding that in many circumstances they have a better chance for getting an acceptable image.

Your image isn't better because you took it with a K-1. The K-1 is just as often the wrong tool for the job as an old 110 film camera might have been. It has no inherent advantage over even a cell phone. They are different. You have to know how to use both to their advantage.

Last edited by normhead; 07-03-2018 at 07:04 AM.
07-03-2018, 06:47 AM - 1 Like   #52
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 28,184
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
It took me w while to wrap my head around the concept, hence my 4 page silence.

Personally I don't think great kit counts for squat. If you plan to sell your images as large scale prints, that is the one and only place great kit really counts. For 95% of photography average kit will do. My favourite example being the old wedding guy shooting a Canon 5D the original, 12MP camera when the D800 came out. Hw worked part time at Henry's and had access to every camera on the market, but he shot his 5D and saw no reason to change. I have never matched a few of the images I took with my 12 MP K-x or even 6 MP images from my original *ist D and K-100D. Photography is right place right time, or a really creative imagination setting up images. What gear you use is for the most part irrelevant if it is the best gear for the job.

I completely can't comprehend some of the above statements about APS-c and K-1s. I've done testing with shots I was sure would demonstrate the superiority of K-1 images, and my wife's K-5 images were just as good as my K-1 images for landscape, identical in fact. Instead of my post being "The K-1 advantage clearly demonstrated" the title became "Can you even tell which is which ?"

And when I'm out in the blind, I may be tempted from time to time to try the K-1, and I do, but it is brutal. The impossibly slow frame rate, the speed at which it fills the buffer, even with the really slow frame rate, the loss of reach and the loss of subject resolution, the loss of one stop of DoF for the same aperture for at best identical images.

So, my contribution to the topic is, I totally don't get it.

My whole response to the "You have to have great gear to get great images." is. "Pffft." Prove it. You may have to have great gear for getting some images, but the odds of an amateur actually knowing how to set up to make use of the resolution of a K-1 are pretty low. It's a small window and hoping you'll luck into getting a few fames that actually make the best use of your camera/lens combo are pretty low, no matter what you shoot. If you just do what everyone else does, high end gear won't separate you from the crowd. And imaginative informed shooting practices combined with almost any modern camera and lens combo will.

My studio instructor at Ryerson devoted day to images he took with the 110 camera he kept in his glove box. He took the time to point out why they were more interesting than if he'd used a larger format. The lesson. Don't worship high end gear. Use the camera for what it's best at. And there isn't one camera that does everything.
Well said sir.

07-03-2018, 07:53 AM - 1 Like   #53
Digitiser of Film
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 20,576
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
It took me w while to wrap my head around the concept, hence my 4 page silence.

...

My studio instructor at Ryerson devoted a class to images he took with the 110 camera he kept in his glove box. He took the time to point out why they were more interesting than if he'd used a larger format. The lesson. Don't worship high end gear. Use the camera for what it's best at. And there isn't one camera that does everything.

If there's one easy lesson amateurs should know, in my opinion, that's it .Never feel you are shooting at a disadvantage. There is always something your $100 point and shoot or bridge camera is better at than the guy with $20,000 worth of gear's kit. It's advice many amateurs need. That feeling of inferiority because some dude has expensive gear he has no idea how to make use of is a big detriment to beginners, who end up thinking about what they don't have, rather than understanding that in many circumstances they have a better chance for getting an acceptable image.

Your image isn't better because you took it with a K-1. The K-1 is just as often the wrong tool for the job as an old 110 film camera might have been. It has no inherent advantage over even a cell phone. They are different. You have to know how to use both to their advantage.
That was worth waiting four pages for. Good summary!
07-03-2018, 09:38 AM - 1 Like   #54
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,448
QuoteOriginally posted by Dartmoor Dave Quote
I think that would be ten highly technically competent but unimaginative photographers, all using the latest top-of-the-range cameras and lenses. Meanwhile, standing a few feet away from them completely unnoticed, a sixteen year old girl with real vision would be creating something amazing with an iPhone.
For me, your example doesn't illustrate the narrative I was trying to convey.

There are many many technically competent AND imaginative photogs out there, quite capable of taking very good photos. And thats the problem, cheaper, lighter cameras, paved roads, good 4x4 vehicles and other modern technologies have given these photogs the opportunities to take images that once required weeks of travel and/or special permits. And sites like instagram and flickr have given them a place to show of their work. So i believe it's only natural to be overwhelmed by the amount of very very good photos in circulation and as a result lose perspective. Where there used to be far fewer published images, a "memorable' photo was easier to find because that person went to places never before seen or had access to equipment that less than 1% of the population could own. That has changed dramatically.

I took the original post to be one of melancholy and burnout, which is a very real malaise every photographer I've ever met goes through from time to time. The point was to recognize one's own limitations and perhaps better understand what prompted the negative emotions in the first place.

And FWIW the day a 16 y/o with an iphone can take a better image than me from the exact same location on the exact same day is the day I give up photography

Last edited by BigMackCam; 07-03-2018 at 09:46 AM. Reason: Keeping it friendly
07-03-2018, 09:46 AM - 1 Like   #55
Veteran Member
SSGGeezer's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Indiana, U.S.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,845
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
Great kit just enables one to up his/her game. When I shot film, I was pretty good with 35mm, and I decided to buy a Pentax 6x7 because it was "better kit". It immediately upped my game with no further effort than having to carry more weight (rather a lot, I would add). After shooting with the 6x7 for a few years, I was finding myself limited in several respects. As a landscape shooter, I was finding the 6x7 to be difficult because securing depth of field is not all that easy with medium format.

In the studio, the 6x7 was dreamy, in the field, not so much.

So, a decision had to be reached, and the hobby part of my photography budget decided that a 4x5 was in my future. I had never have been able to justify it in my professional work, although it turned out having the view camera opened several doors that I hadn't previously looked at, so in this case, hobby crossed into pro rather quickly.

However, I bought the view camera primarily to up my landscape game, which was the type of photography I did to relax. I did sell prints from time to time, but not enough to justify the 4x5 from a business perspective. At the same time, the 4x5 very quickly became indispensable to my pro work because of what it allowed me to take on.

What the 4x5 did for me was allow much greater control of depth of field. What had previously been impossible on 6x7, or possible with greatly compromised image quality on 35mm, was suddenly simple because of camera movements, and my landscape work became much better, though the learning curve was steep. I worked with Fred Picker of Zone VI Studios learning and tweaking his exposure system that was a huge improvement over the Zone System. It took me a year of hard work to become really proficient with 4x5.

So yes, great kit will improve your photography if you let it, but to let it, you have to be prepared to work at it.

I think the problem we are having with great kit now is that the end results aren't really being viewed in such a way as to show what a difference really good equipment can make.
On a web page, it's hard to justify a full frame sensor when something tossed out by an iPhone user looks just as good.

The internet and the image galleries on it are a two edged sword. The democratization of image sharing allows for everyone to showcase what they do, but the small size that images are shown at also democratize quality.
It's impossible to excel at 600x900 pixels. At that size, everything looks more or less the same.

Sure, better kit allows you to up your game, but internet viewing brings it right back into the gutter that is the lowest common denominator.

If you make prints, then suddenly everything changes. I have pictures on my walls spanning over 40 years of my own photography. I am still displaying pictures taken when I was in my late teens taken on 35mm. I have pictures shot on 6x7 and 4x5 film, as well as 6mp, 10mp, 16mp, 24mp APS-C format and 36mp full frame.
I can look at these images and see what the larger film format did for me, and with the move to digital, what more megapixels and a larger sensor did for me as well.

I also have pictures posted to the PUG from most of these formats and cameras at fairly small screen resolutions. If all I had to go by was my gallery images on the PUG, I would be hard pressed to justify moving past 35mm film.

My advice, if you are feeling jaded, is to make a conscious effort to stop looking at pictures on the web, and stop looking at your own pictures at web resolution.
Make some prints instead. Make some big ones and hang them on the wall.
That will tell you where your game is at.
I have made some prints just the quick and dirty way by printing some of my favorites to see and give to a few friends, and it does look different. I accidentally printed a shot I liked for the bokeh at 16x24, (miss clicked as I wanted to view as I had it cropped,) and it looks nice but I should have it printed by whitewall or Adorama on different papers (but smaller,) to see what makes it pop. Like the metallic sheen might have worked better than just Walgreens photo paper. maybe canvas but that is pricy to try. I find some look better printed, but I also find my mistakes become magnified, even at 5x7 or 4x6.
07-03-2018, 09:49 AM   #56
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 28,184
QuoteOriginally posted by nomadkng Quote
And FWIW the day a 16 y/o with an iphone can take a better image than me from the exact same location on the exact same day is the day I give up photography
She'll be using the PIxel 2...
07-03-2018, 09:49 AM - 3 Likes   #57
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by nomadkng Quote
How ingenious of you to change the narrative to add a little snark for cheap laughs. Your "transalation" was not even close to the narrative I was trying to convey.

There are many many technically competent AND imaginative photogs out there, quite capable of taking very good photos. And thats the problem, cheaper, lighter cameras, paved roads, good 4x4 vehicles and other modern technologies have given these photogs the opportunities to take images that once required weeks of travel and/or special permits. And sites like instagram and flickr have given them a place to show of their work. So i believe it's only natural to be overwhelmed by the amount of very very good photos in circulation and as a result lose perspective. Where there used to be far fewer published images, a "memorable' photo was easier to find because that person went to places never before seen or had access to equipment that less than 1% of the population could own. That has changed dramatically.

I took the original post to be one of melancholy and burnout, which is a very real malaise every photographer I've ever met goes through from time to time. The point was to recognize one's own limitations and perhaps better understand what prompted the negative emotions in the first place.

And FWIW the day a 16 y/o with an iphone can take a better image than me from the exact same location on the exact same day is the day I give up photography.
It happens, get used to it. Wider depth of field in the same light is a huge advantage. If you go to one of the "Best cell phone pictures of the year" sites, you'll see images that would be impossible with a K-1 or K-3. By the time you stopped down to achieve the DoF needed you'd have a motion blurred subject. A cell phone at ƒ2.8 has a much faster shutter speed than a DSLR at ƒ16. This is strictly a technical issue with the equipment used. Chest thumping assertions don't change a thing.

It may not be better printed at 60"x40" but being able to print it big is not a necessary quality of many images, as much as a few vociferous posters on the site like to pretend it is. It may be for them, but there isn't more than about 5 of them preaching to 60,000 users, the vast majority of whom have absolutely no desire to print big.

Last edited by normhead; 07-03-2018 at 09:59 AM.
07-03-2018, 09:54 AM - 1 Like   #58
Digitiser of Film
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 20,576
QuoteOriginally posted by nomadkng Quote
the day a 16 y/o with an iphone can take a better image than me from the exact same location on the exact same day is the day I give up photography
I think Dave's point (and I'm sure he'll correct me if I'm mistaken) is that many trained photographers are looking for very similar things when presented with a subject or scene, whereas a wet-behind-the-ears 16y/o - especially one who isn't yet trained or experienced in photography, or bogged down with advanced equipment - might just see things differently, and chance upon something the trained folks might never have considered. On occasion, that can trump years of training and skills development...
07-03-2018, 10:23 AM - 3 Likes   #59
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
I think Dave's point (and I'm sure he'll correct me if I'm mistaken) is that many trained photographers are looking for very similar things when presented with a subject or scene, whereas a wet-behind-the-ears 16y/o - especially one who isn't yet trained or experienced in photography, or bogged down with advanced equipment - might just see things differently, and chance upon something the trained folks might never have considered. On occasion, that can trump years of training and skills development...
I'm just basing this on my experience last year with my grandson and his iPhone. He's completely untrained in photography, but he's excellent at seeing a compelling image on the screen of his phone. After spending 3 days in the bush with him, he got some great shots. Was every one of my shots better than every one of his shots? Hardly. He came up with some great images. He was 20, not 16, but, still.

There is nothing as irrelevant to most of us as people saying they need this or that because they print big. Maybe there should be a section fo the forum for those who print big. (all 10 of them or whatever.) They don't seem to realize how irrelevant their experience is to others. I've shot 8x10 and 4x5 film as well as 645 film, and I can say straight up, I could never get with those cameras much of what I have taken with my K-3 even. Sometimes I'll scramble and bushwhack up to the top of a lookout I saw from my canoe, to get a view of a lake that only a few have even seen before, forget about photographed. That doesn't happen with a 70 pound 8x10 view camera and tripod.. Even Ansel Adams with his donkey couldn't get to some of these places.

So the suggestion you can drive everywhere just makes me laugh. You can drive anywhere that's really popular. Guides will show you exactly where Ansel Adams set up his tripod (then put their tripod there and their and leave you to try and find a better spot.) There are an aweful lot of great images that can be taken off road. Portablilty is just as important as it ever was.

Simple fact, heavy equipment is better, only if you get the shot. If you don't, it's costs you dearly. Having used the formats I have, I have no particular love for large format. I didn't even like carrying 645 gear. I like going light, and getting images others can't, because they can't shoot from where I'm shooting. Even with the guys I take out as a guide, many of them miss images I get because they use tripods etc. I just take 4-6 images and trust shake reduction will do it's magic on one of them. There are different ways of approaching these things, and though many assume slow and deliberate is better, sometimes it gets you nothing, and you pass on great images because your gear got in your way. A guy using heavy gear is trading many lost opportunities for a better result from the ones he/she does get. Now you can argue that's better, but it depends on the values of the person doing the shooting.

Some are going to be happier with their cellphone images. Not because they don't know any better, but because their preference is such that they'd rather be un-encumbered by heavy gear, while still getting a fantastic sunset or whatever.

I seriously wonder how many people have ended up following inappropriate (to them) advice from big printers who want extraordinary detail in large prints and are willing to do almost anything to get it. For those who want to get into the tilt shift options, that's different. But I've seen an awful lot of tilt shift photography that I wondered if just shooting with a DSLR wouldn't have been better. Shooting large format is no guarantee of anything, except that you better be in shape to carry a lot heavier kit.

You may get better images, but there's no guarantee. Having portable gear leads to a lot more opportunities. Feel like I'm talking to a bunch of people who have never lugged a 70 pound view camera kit all over Toronto. Those negatives are amazing. I wouldn't do it again without some serious dollars, like enough to pay a porter with some serious coin left over for myself, but if some want to do that for their hobby, more power to them. To me, a DSLR is a lot more enjoyable, but each to their own I guess.

You could miss a whole sunset series, to set up one shot, that in the end isn't any better than the DSLR would have been. You could miss the peak of the sunset messing around with the tilt shift controls trying to get everything perfect. I can't believe people discussing these types of options without mentioning the huge downside. My advice would be, use your view camera, but take your DSLR and make sure you get something, just to make sure you don't completely waste your time, energy and money.

Last edited by normhead; 07-03-2018 at 10:54 AM.
07-03-2018, 10:28 AM - 1 Like   #60
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 15,903
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
That was worth waiting four pages for. Good summary!
Actually it's a false narrative that has some holes large enough to sail a cruise ship through. I will leave it at that. I can agree to disagree.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
anxiety, art, boundaries, couple, dedication, eye, fear, gear, goal, images, improvement, jaws, kit, lens, lenses, lot, math, package, performance, photography, quality, ratio, rendering, resolution, salmon, samsung, similarities, tamron, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Flickr Followers - as much a curse as a blessing? pathdoc General Photography 61 10-02-2017 09:56 PM
Cityscape Blessing loplop Pentax K-3 Photo Contest 0 05-11-2014 07:38 AM
People Just a flare....or heaven's blessing? shutterbob Pentax K-3 Photo Contest 0 04-28-2014 07:01 PM
Indian Water Blessing SCguy Post Your Photos! 1 03-14-2009 04:37 PM
unified brand or mixed for film/digital kit? OniFactor Photographic Technique 4 06-16-2008 06:05 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:38 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top