How to shoot better auto photographs - UPDATED 11-15-02 - Page 3 - The Unofficial BMW M5 Messageboard (m5board.com)

CM5GO · 22nd January 2002, 17:15

Thanks Greg! Im going to go take some pics!

greg · 22nd January 2002, 17:35

Ivandias -

I laughed so hard at your post I can hardly see to type this.

Thanks, everyone - glad you liked it.

Think I'll start on the "Dating Britney" one next.

Jason - GREAT shot of Seattle!

atomic80 · 22nd January 2002, 17:48

IvanDias:

You're one of the few folks on this board that can make everybody laugh long enough to leave them gasping for air!

I hereby nominate IvanDias as our official bmwm5.com mascot for comedic relief!

Oh by the way,

chazzy · 22nd January 2002, 19:51

Quote:

Originally posted by atomic80
I hereby nominate IvanDias as our official bmwm5.com mascot for comedic relief!

"What do ya mean, funny? Let me understand this cause, I don't know maybe it's me, I'm a little f---ed up maybe, but I'm funny how? I mean, funny like I'm a clown, I amuse you? I make you laugh... I'm here to f---in' amuse you? What do you mean funny, funny how? How am I funny?"

V-10 4 Me · 27th September 2003, 08:05

Great Information Greg! It's always informative reading your posts...

Jim Dolan · 27th September 2003, 17:02

Sometimes the subject is not always still.

Need4Spd · 9th November 2004, 20:10

Hey guys, any thoughts on whether this camera is any good? Thinking of getting a point and shoot, highly portable 5 mpxl camera and someone suggested this one.

Jim Dolan · 10th November 2004, 02:19

Good pictures require good equipment. You don't say how much the camera costs which may indicate the quality of glass or plastic lenses and so forth.

My rule of thumb is that quality digital cameras start at $500 for fixed lens and $1,000 for SLR camera body only.

In this photo notice the Osprey's mate in the far background.

Need4Spd · 23rd November 2004, 21:14

Quote:

Good pictures require good equipment. You don't say how much the camera costs which may indicate the quality of glass or plastic lenses and so forth.

The Lumix is about $500 retail, and is only a point and shoot, though a very nice point and shoot. It's made by Panasonic and has a Leica Elmarit lens. Size and portability are important to me as this would be my travel camera. My other choices are Sony's DSC T1 and the Pentax Optio S5i, both ultracompacts and both about the same money give or take.

I agree that for serious photos (your Osprey photo is awesome!), a digital SLR would be far superior.

Need4Spd · 11th December 2004, 09:51

Update. After looking at what seems like every ultracompact digital camera in the 4-5 megapixel range, I bought a Canon SD300. IMHO it's the best of the bunch. Very fast start up and between shot time. Shutter lag is almost nonexistent, and the controls have a quality feel, like the switches on our M5s. More robust in construction than the Pentax Optio 4Si or 5Si and the travel charger is far more portable. More compact than the Panasonic Lumix FX7. While the Lumix has a larger LCD, it's a lower resolution screen and the images looked grainy (the pictures themselves were fine, however), and it lacked an optical viewfinder, important sometimes in bright sunlight. And speaking of sunlight, the Canon's 2" LCD has a nice antireflective coating.