Digital photography

fast prime lenses? Sony nex with zeiss shirley?

You'll never get me to pay for a sony, don't know why but I dont like them at all.

Plus I can get something like a GF5 body for near enough £100

I like this--the leg swings of the two people in the centre and the composition, perspective, and ambience.

Best camera is the one you have with you... Done a gazillion times before but I'll always appreciate the majesty of flying...

Same here, i always take a few of these snaps when I fly

Not overly... Used my old man's film slr a bit growing up but that was a long time ago and I could use a refersher for sure so a book starting from scratch with the basics would probably be most useful.

Sorry I can't recommend a book, I did always look out for someone who knew his shit and asked.
Maybe it's different from person to person but I never liked to learn stuff like this from books.
So If I were you I'd get a grip (again) on the fundamental stuff, asking friends or using the internet -
aperture / shutter speeds / depth-of-field / exposure modes / iso / etc. -
then play around with the DSLR in manual mode until I'd have this internalised,
after that read the manual of my model, get a grip on how the thing works & how you set more advanced things.

and cheap(ish) got any sample images?

..see spooter's post, or here: http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=Pro-Optic%208mm%20f%2F3.5%20Fisheye

I found this very good for the basics of using an SLR
Understanding Exposure, 3rd Edition: How to Shoot Great Photographs with Any Camera: Amazon.co.uk: Bryan Peterson: Books

I've been thinking about getting one of these mirrorless cameras just so i can take nice pictures of concerts, it's a pain in the ass when they don't let you get with a DSLR because it's a "professional" camera. :(

I'm in a similar boat, considering switching from a Pentax K-x to a Olympus PEN (smaller and it will be in my bag a lot more).

What they deem a professional camera is completely up to them. I had a hard time convincing a guy that my old lumix super zoom wasn't a "35mm" as he put it. I asked him if he knew what the 35mm even referred to in a non-bitchy way but still... Some venues just don't like cameras which sucks balls because they'll let some twat stand there filming it on his iPad.

I've been thinking about getting one of these mirrorless cameras just so i can take nice pictures of concerts, it's a pain in the ass when they don't let you get with a DSLR because it's a "professional" camera. :(

How about just watch the band? If you HAVE to take a photo you can use your phone. Photographers are (barely) hired to take photos. You are undermining us.

It shouldn't matter what kind of camera I'm using, either. If I'm using an ipad then I'm using an ipad. The difference is that I'm the person being paid to do so, and you're not. Having a 'pro' rig is meaningless when everyone has one.

Sorry, just a major pet peeve.

One of mine from a couple weeks ago

Gooby plz

Amazing light/haze. Could almost be hong Kong...

Omonia, Athens - a man selling garlic out of a shopping trolley.

Omonia, Athens - a sign shop (yes even number plates)

Monastiraki, Athens - an old bicycle (as this is a bike forum!!!)

(as this is a bike forum!!!)

*No!
*

Love that old bike shot, nice glow.

I like music, i like live bands, i like live bands pictures, why should I wouldn't take it? I'm not going to sell it or something like that neither are the bands using my pics for marketing or something like that.

That's the point I'm not a professional photographer, just an amateur. I don't have a "professional rig" most of the time I just use a 50mm lens.
But the bouncers are instructed that if you can change the lens it's a professional camera. And I have the shittiest phone ever, it's impossible to take pictures on it.

How about just watch the band? If you HAVE to take a photo you can use your phone. Photographers are (barely) hired to take photos. You are undermining us.

It shouldn't matter what kind of camera I'm using, either. If I'm using an ipad then I'm using an ipad. The difference is that I'm the person being paid to do so, and you're not. Having a 'pro' rig is meaningless when everyone has one.

Sorry, just a major pet peeve.

And taking photos of a sunset is putting landscape photographers out of work.

I'm a print journalist. Can you bastards stop writing words on the internet already? I mean, Jesus.

How about just watch the band? If you HAVE to take a photo you can use your phone. Photographers are (barely) hired to take photos. You are undermining us.

It shouldn't matter what kind of camera I'm using, either. If I'm using an ipad then I'm using an ipad. The difference is that I'm the person being paid to do so, and you're not. Having a 'pro' rig is meaningless when everyone has one.

Sorry, just a major pet peeve.

It's not undermining anyone, the photographer still gets paid, and if people want to remember their night out by taking nice shots then fair enough. And anyway, how is one meant to improve ones photography in that situation without practice?

"Having a pro rig is meaningless when everyone has one" that's just a bit silly really. People go to gigs for fun, take pictures for fun, and if it's a hobby then you might invest in some nice kit. In the same way you might buy some decent speakers for your living room, it's nice to have a decent camera, and gigs are brilliant places to get good shots!

Major pet peeve, sorry.

Well, actually, photography, by nature, suffers from a kind of technological fetishism. The same can't be said of journalism, or even music.

Many venues and promoters simply don't want to pay for photographers any more. Why? Because 'my mate/that guy/my nan has a big camera'. It's a shame but it's true and it means a lot of hard working guys have had to retreat into weddings etc, regardless of their talent. This I admit isn't the direct fault of antisocial crowd photographers, but it certainly doesn't help!

How comes you can't film or take pictures in a cinema? Surely you paid for the experience and you want to share it? Even neglecting the issue of copyright, it's just plain antisocial! I despair when I'm actually lucky enough to watch a gig and some prat in front of me decides to show me most of it via his camera screen. Its invasive and distracting (two things a professional photographer is payed NOT to be). It's not really very respectful of the act, either. They're there to perform for you, in that moment. Not for your Facebook buddies. I

If you want to practice, or actually start taking pictures at events legitimately, just ask the promoter or the venue. You'll be surprised.

In my opinion, gigs are brilliant places to watch live music. But taking pictures of the band throughout is just lame and shows you're not really invested in the performance.

I understand taking a memento, but documenting the performance is being done for you by someone else who is payed to do it, and in all likelihood is in a better position to do so. You wouldn't take a bomber jacket with you, stand on the door and refuse people entry just because it's your hobby or you're trying to become a doorman.

I hear some of the points you're trying to make,
but in the end it pretty much breaks down to "well, deal with it, dude".

This is the 21st century, everybody has cameraphones / iPads / DSLR's / whatever,
they are fucking using them and it will be on some google or yahoo service an instant later.

They're there to perform for you, in that moment. Not for your Facebook buddies. I

i'm sure a band is gonna be really pissed that you're sharing your interest in their music on facebook where you have hundreds or even possibly thousands of prospective viewers.

I get that its hard to work in the gig photography business, but being this sacred about it is a little ridiculous man, just let it be in the knowledge that you're taking decent images.

God I'm grumpy.

i'm sure a band is gonna be really pissed that you're sharing your interest in their music on facebook where you have hundreds or even possibly thousands of prospective viewers.

I get that its hard to work in the gig photography business, but being this sacred about it is a little ridiculous man, just let it be in the knowledge that you're taking decent images.

It's not the sharing that's the issue, it's the staring out into a sea of cameras instead of faces that's a little disconcerting.

I hear some of the points you're trying to make,
but in the end it pretty much breaks down to "well, deal with it, dude".

This is the 21st century, everybody has cameraphones / iPads / DSLR's / whatever,
they are fucking using them and it will be on some google or yahoo service an instant later.

I realise I sound sour, I am sour. I just think that being asked not to come to gigs with the express purpose of taking lots of photos is a perfectly reasonable request, and that it is in fact the punters who whine about not being able to use a proper camera that should just 'deal with it'.

I love photography. I'm glad that everyone does. I also love taking pictures with my phone and sharing and stuff. It's just a lot of the time I envy the people who can just enjoy a show or an act or whatever without the need to take pictures, but they're doing it anyway!

Meh