SeilerBird uses a real camera

The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an RV or an interest in RVing!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

SeilerBird

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Posts
18,081
Location
St Cloud Florida USA
and I hated every second of it. I was shooting with both a cell phone camera and my bridge camera. It is a real drag trying to use a viewfinder when I am used to looking at a 6 inch LCD screen. I use my right eye to look through the viewfinder and that eye is starting to show the effects of cataract clouding. It is only in the beginning stages but there is just enough distortion to make it miserable. It did not dawn on me to try and use the 3 inch LCD on the camera, but that is not always easy. Then when I got home I had to upload the photos which is a time consuming drag. I am so used to no SD card and no uploading. The photos just magically appear online. So simple, cheap and easy. And of course the cell phone camera runs rings around the bridge camera as far as shots turning out right. With the bridge camera I get a lot of rejects, but the cell phone camera gets it right on almost every shot. I am just spoiled by my Pixel.

http://www.dickpritchettrealestate.com/eagle-feed.html

My brother who lives in Utah has been monitoring the Southwest Florida Eagle Cam and he got me addicted to watching the nest. Last year I started watching after the chick had fledged and didn't get to see much. But this year I was watching it every day in December waiting for the eggs to drop. Harriet dropped two eggs right around Christmas and both hatched a month later. They are now almost three months old and fledged about two weeks ago. Both chicks are doing really well learning how to hunt. So I watch these guys every single day and I almost feel like a dad to E10 and E11. I decided to cruise on down to Fort Myers to see the nest in person. It was really cool. You can get to within about 50 yards of the nest and there are four eagles in the area putting on a show.

I started sending photos to my brother and he called me and told me to wave so he could see me on one of the three cameras. He found me pretty easy since they have 360 degree camera also. Some of the photos are from the cell phone and some from the bridge camera. See if you can guess which one took which photo just by looking at the photos. Since I am a bird photographer I feel the eagle cam is way more entertaining than any program on TV.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/1XyA0nTuulnIAubw1
 
Tom, there's no disputing the results you get with your Pixel. One question ... do you have any issues with being able to see the screen while shooting in bright sunlight? On my bridge cameras, I find myself having to switch from the 3" screen to the viewfinder to be able to "see" the scene/subject.

It might be my eyes. I've been photophobic for as long as I can remember, and have had to wear photochromatic lenses for many years. I don't have the glasses on while taking a shot, and my eyes might be closing down in bright sunlight, whereas there's no bright sunlight on them with one closed and the other against the rubber boot of the viewfinder.
 
I cannot remember not being able to take a shot due to direct sunlight. My number on rule is to always have the sun hitting you in the back of the head. So the screen is always visible. If you shoot against the sun there will be problems no matter what type of viewfinder you use. I switched to using cell phone camera about three years ago and if I would have had problems I would have switched back. The Pixel has one of the brightest screens on the market. You could head on down to a Verizon store (or whatever your carrier is) and try one out. I am sure they would let you take it outside to see how you do with it.
 
[quote author=SeilerBird]My number on rule is to always have the sun hitting you in the back of the head.[/quote]

Yes, photography 101. Unfortunately, that sun is on the screen and makes it tough (for me) to see what's on the screen.

The Pixel has one of the brightest screens on the market.

That could well be the answer.
 
The photos just magically appear online.
Which is where I don't want them. It just takes a couple of minutes to hook up a USB cable and download from the camera, and they go where I want them -- to my computer.

I cannot remember not being able to take a shot due to direct sunlight.
I've tried using the screens on my Nikon, on my camcorders (Sony and Canon) and on my Huawei phone. Sometimes I can't see enough in the screen to reliably frame the shot, sometimes I can't see the subject at all (whether the sun is in front, behind or to the side is immaterial -- it happens with all). Reverting to the viewfinder lets me do well. Besides, it's normally more comfortable, and certainly more stable, to have the camera braced against my head rather than using two unsupported hands, though there are occasions when it's nice to be able to choose the screen for certain camera positions (over my head, for example, or way low).

Besides, how do you get a recognizable airplane (especially above a couple of hundred feet), or a bison or bear that's over a hundred yards away?

My number on rule is to always have the sun hitting you in the back of the head.
Generally speaking that's a good rule of thumb, but there are times when sidelighting, or even backlighting is desirable.

Note that I'm not knocking the pictures you get -- they're great -- but how many potential shots do you miss? For your uses, evidently that works fine. I'd just about give up photography if I had to use a phone all the time, I can't count how many times I wanted a camera with me for a shot I spotted, but the phone wasn't up to the task -- mostly distance and/or background, but sometimes glare on the screen, as well.
 
Enjoyed the eagle shots but my first love is the blanket on the grazing Appaloosa.  ;)
 
Tom said:
Yes, photography 101. Unfortunately, that sun is on the screen and makes it tough (for me) to see what's on the screen.
Well when the sun is hitting you in the back of the head then the shadow of your head should be being cast on the screen making it easy to see.
 
Larry N. said:
Which is where I don't want them. It just takes a couple of minutes to hook up a USB cable and download from the camera, and they go where I want them -- to my computer.
When they appear online they are viewable immediately with either my laptop, my Chromebook, either of my phones, my TV or my Fire. They are immediately on any computer I use. Not just the one I uploaded it to. Like I said, it is cheaper, easier and faster.
Besides, how do you get a recognizable airplane (especially above a couple of hundred feet), or a bison or bear that's over a hundred yards away?
There are many shots that a cell phone cannot take at this point in time. In a few years that problem will be solved.
Generally speaking that's a good rule of thumb, but there are times when sidelighting, or even backlighting is desirable.
Yes there is, but the rule is a general rule for all of photography. Without light you don't have a photo. Side lighting and back lighting work fine every once in a while, like on the cover of Meet the Beatles. But in general for wildlife photography side lighting and back lighting usually sucks.

Note that I'm not knocking the pictures you get -- they're great -- but how many potential shots do you miss? For your uses, evidently that works fine. I'd just about give up photography if I had to use a phone all the time, I can't count how many times I wanted a camera with me for a shot I spotted, but the phone wasn't up to the task -- mostly distance and/or background, but sometimes glare on the screen, as well.
I miss a hell of a lot of shots. But when I was wandering around with my DSLR with my 150-500 zoom lens I missed just as many if not more due to the lack of a wide angle. I never take a backpack full of lenses into the field. One camera and one lens is what I usually have. There is no camera that can take photos in all situations. I missed all kinds of great shots because my zoom only went out to 500mm. With a 1000mm lens I could have gotten a lot more shots but then I would need to hire a Sherpa to carry it around. Larry, I am not trying to convince you to only use a cell phone, I don't care what you shoot with. At my age I just don't want to drag around a huge camera anymore. My back just can't take it. What really ticks me off the most is the sheer number of shots I miss taking because I am driving a car when I see the shot and I cannot pull off to take the shot. Happens about once a mile for me.
 

Attachments

  • Tom 2008-24.jpg
    Tom 2008-24.jpg
    190 KB · Views: 24
  • meet beatles.jpeg
    meet beatles.jpeg
    8.6 KB · Views: 16
That happens a lot, it is frustrating. I seldom use the cell for pictures because of a congenital tremor, I cannot hold it steady enough and the screen is hard to see in bright light. To be fair it is an iphone 5, I am sure the newer ones are much better. I have a DSLR but like you don't use it much because of the inconvenience, the p&s in my breast pocket is the go to although it has it's limits.
 
Roy M said:
That happens a lot, it is frustrating. I seldom use the cell for pictures because of a congenital tremor, I cannot hold it steady enough and the screen is hard to see in bright light. To be fair it is an iphone 5, I am sure the newer ones are much better. I have a DSLR but like you don't use it much because of the inconvenience, the p&s in my breast pocket is the go to although it has it's limits.
My Pixel is hard to shake. It has built in image stabilization. Both mechanical and electronic.
 
I use my Samsung Galaxy 7s. Most outdoor pictures I take I can't see what I am shooting due to glare from sun, wearing polarized sunglasses, or simply no glasses, in which case I can't see much. I generally point and shoot, moving the camera slightly one way and the other and up and down. Then later I just select the best one of the group and delete the rest.

I am usually surprised at what appears in the shot. For instance, I took a shot of the Stirling Bridge near the William Wallace Monument in Stirling, Scotland. Besides a nice picture of the bridge, I also captured a bird flying over.

I never was or will be a pro, so maybe not as picky with all of the things pros consider important.

I will try and post the picture.
 
Tom,
Since you know your way around cameras....
We visited the Grand Canyon a few weeks ago for the first time. Breathtaking views. My pictures from the iphone are good but just don't grasp the depth perception and the vastness. Does a better camera capture this? Or am I destined to these images in my head?
 
Does a better camera capture this? Or am I destined to these images in my head?

Maybe a little better, because you can get better depth of field, and various levels of focus, but even Ansel Adams could not capture the beauty of nature the way we see it with our own eyes.
 
Caryl is right, Bob -- there's just so much in the canyon (and many other places, too) that it's impossible for a camera to capture. Part of it is the field of view, but there's a lot more to it than that. A picture doesn't surround us and immerse us the way being there does.

but just don't grasp the depth perception and the vastness.

If you get your face right against the picture, you can restore a LITTLE of that, but you're still missing a lot.
 
Comparing a photo of the Grand Canyon to the real thing is like comparing having sex with a high priced hooker to reading Playboy. Just not the same. It is the main reason I tell people to hike into the canyon. There are wildfires on both the north and south rims almost every day in summer and the canyon always has a lot of haze which is not evident when viewing it live but it really show up in photos. The north rim and the south rim are separated by around ten miles. It is hard to get a really clear shot of anything that is ten miles away. If you look in my signature I have a link to over 300 of my best Grand Canyon photos. There are a few nice ones of the canyon and everyone of those nice shots were taken almost directly after a rain storm. If you ever go back just wait for the rain to shoot the canyon so you at least have a half a chance.
 
No doubt SeilerBird has taken many good nature "snapshots"  Bird has told me that he loves to push my photographic "buttons" so I have avoided photography topics on the forum for a long time. When I checked in today I found that Bird still insists that his cell phone snapshots are equal to or better than DSLR's with quality glass. This is a disservice to members who want to develop their photography skills beyond cell phone snapshots.  I hope that Bird will consider repositioning himself as an expert in cell phone photography.  Although I am a professionally trained photographer I can certainly use some tips on cell phone photography plus Bird wouldn't have to bang his head trying to convince pro photographers that a cell phone is better.
 
Bob, I'm not a landscape photographer but I do know several.  They would agree with me that a good DSLR and good glass along with good post-processing will help capture your memories.  (I suspect you already know that.)  BTW there are several retouchers that can help however I don't know if their services are available to the public. Be sure to capture your images in RAW.  They are the easiest to enhance.  Let me know if I can help. 
 
I have never before heard Tom Seiler referred to as Bird.  Obviously his is not the only ego that gets tiptoed around here.
 
MN Blue Skies said:
I've noticed that members tiptoe around Bird's ego. No doubt he has taken many good nature "snapshots"  Bird has told me that he loves to push my photographic "buttons" so I have avoided this topic for a long time.  When I checked in today I found that Bird still insists that his cell phone snapshots are equal to or better than DSLR's with quality glass. This is a disservice to members who want to develop their photography skills beyond cell phone snapshots.  I hope that Bird will consider repositioning himself as an expert in cell phone photography.  Although I am a professionally trained photographer I can certainly use some tips on cell phone photography plus Bird wouldn't have to bang his head trying to convince pro photographers that a cell phone is better.

Max, thanks for this. You've said it way better than I could. I'm not a professional but consider myself an advanced enthusiast. I've been published, won prizes and been paid for a couple of pictures. I'm always on a learning curve and agree that DSLR is superior to cell phone.  I'm always happy to learn more too. So, cell phones, p&s, DSLR are all fair game for me. But, ultimately it's DSLR for me if I want best results.
 
Dream Chasers said:
I use my Samsung Galaxy 7s. Most outdoor pictures I take I can't see what I am shooting due to glare from sun, wearing polarized sunglasses, or simply no glasses, in which case I can't see much. I generally point and shoot, moving the camera slightly one way and the other and up and down. Then later I just select the best one of the group and delete the rest.

I am usually surprised at what appears in the shot. For instance, I took a shot of the Stirling Bridge near the William Wallace Monument in Stirling, Scotland. Besides a nice picture of the bridge, I also captured a bird flying over.

I never was or will be a pro, so maybe not as picky with all of the things pros consider important.

I will try and post the picture.

The view from my living room window.  Wallace Monument in the centre...


I like having my cell phone to take pictures on the spur of the moment, but the DSLR definitely has better quality photos and you can do more with them.  It's all about preference.
 

Attachments

  • FB_IMG_1523555030862.jpg
    FB_IMG_1523555030862.jpg
    9 KB · Views: 21

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
131,749
Posts
1,384,226
Members
137,520
Latest member
jeep3501
Back
Top Bottom