Winter pics from the DC'ers

Ok, a question to you experts. When I see an ad for a camera and it says "body only", what would I get?

Sounds like you would get a camera housing, part of a camera kit?

Beats me...

Anyway, here is a pic outside my window in winter...well, kinda out my window.

(DC)DEMONSLAYER wrote:

Ok, a question to you experts. When I see an ad for a camera and it says "body only", what would I get?

You'd get something like this (not my photo!):
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=278068890&size=m

Which means you must buy at least one lens to go along with it, so that you are actually able to take pictures. Lenses start at 100$ and go typically up to 10000$ and more. Consumer lenses stop at around 2k mark. When you attach a typicall (cheap) lens it looks like this (not my photo!):
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=245215679&size=m

You must buy a lens that fits your lens mount. Some DSLRs are alredy offered together with lenses, usually refered to as "kits" and some DSLRs are offered only as kits (so you can't buy body only). Example of this is Nikon D40 and D40X.

The idea behind it is to invest in lenses, which last decades and be able to switch cameras as technology advances/camera dies etc. Optically, lenses from a few decades ago perform as good as new (while some old even outperform newer).

@Botfodder: When you say strobe(s), are those normal Canon strobes in a housing or special underwater strobes? I guess it must be expensive stuff (especially if it leaks, hehe).

So a "camera body" is not just a housing with nothing inside......

With "body", a seller is referring to a fully functional camera without a lens attached.

Yup. As long as you call a camera without a lens fully functionall.

Why would anyone want a camera housing with nothing inside? To pose as a pro photographer and stalk supermodels?

Hey, to me a camera is just something to play with. I don't plan to shoot underwater, shoot slow motion, etc. However, I want to be able to target and shoot a moose/elk/deer/bird/puma/etc at 100+ yards.

(DC)DEMONSLAYER wrote:

Hey, to me a camera is just something to play with. I don't plan to shoot underwater, shoot slow motion, etc. However, I want to be able to target and shoot a moose/elk/deer/bird/puma/etc at 100+ yards.

Dont you need a hunter's license for that

lol...
ahem
[/cheesy joke]

-Jason_x- wrote:

Dont you need a hunter's license for that
lol...
ahem
[/cheesy joke]

Only if I targeting them thru a scope, which I have done in the past.

Wonko The Sane wrote:

@Botfodder: When you say strobe(s), are those normal Canon strobes in a housing or special underwater strobes? I guess it must be expensive stuff (especially if it leaks, hehe).

Actually underwater camera gear manufacturers (say, like Ikelite) provide large external strobes that, through cabling, use the "TTL" protocol for determining how brightly and how long they stay lit. They are very heavy. Some rough pricing:

Housing "body" - $1200
Ikelite 125 strobe with arms - $850
Ports and port parts - usually anywhere from $150 on up to $350 I guess

I would say I've easily spent $3750 on housing stuff - and I spent $2000 or so when I first got the camera (including lenses, body, bag, tripod).

Demonslayer: My 100mm macro ran around $500, if memory serves. I've seen a really nice Canon image stabilizing 100-400mm telephoto I've wanted that's been listed at $7000 - marked down from $12,000, if I recall correctly (that may have also been the IS 600mm I was drooling over, can't remember).

For those that don't know: macro lenses are designed to focus on things close up - for example, if you look at some of my macro shots from the earlier post, you're looking at full framed shots of creatures that might not even hit 2 inches long; I'd say that yellow headed jawfish was at most 3". Most lenses have trouble focusing on anything that close (as an underwater parallel, they advise using a +2 diopter from a "macro kit" on my wide angle lens to help it deal with the light altering properties of water). I have several shots in my gallery where I use the macro lens and I'm possibly as close as a foot or so away from the object.

Not a lot going on now - give me an hour or so and I'll have an album on my site about the housing and what it looks like taken apart and put together ...

Okay, here it is:

http://gallery.ericdives.com/thumbnails.php?album=32

This will give you an idea of what's involved in underwater photography.

Thanks for those photos, Bot. The comments you put there were great help to understand what is it all about. It looks like one of the more complicated fields of photography. :] Your avatar is of your doing I suppose?

The camera housing, does it enable all camera controls that you'd be able to use otherwise (like MF, switching metering, adjusting ISO, white balance, sharpness, color mode, bracketing, LCD preview etc.) or just the more important ones?

Yes - my current avatar is a crop of a shot I took with the "old" PC110 video camera. Do not mistake it for a macro shot by any means - here's a link to the dive I took it on (I think it was this dive):

http://scuba.ericdives.com/log/showday.php?DIVEDATE=2007-01-03

This was during my Australia trip last year, and taking the photo was easily considering we're talking a 3'+, probably 250-300lb cod as the subject. See other photos on the dive - I have a shot of the cod and a buddy for a size comparison.

That buddy, BTW, is a hefty guy that played basketball in college ...

Couple more for fun! We've been getting nailed here so yeah!

This was up at Brighton ski resort just after an awesome storm in mid-December. Moguls...mmmmm....

(click here for big)

And this one was this morning walking into work! Dumped like crazy last night and all morning.

(click here for big)

So yeah, massive amounts of powdery goodness!

cheers.
t.

First one is beautifull but could use a better crop in my opinion.

The second one is simply work of art... Kudos!

It did not get much "wintery" here this year. This is all the snow I found (the Alps):