Photography. I've actually been asked by some "what is photography?" and while that may seem like a simple question, it's actually a very good one. Some people don't feel comfortable with photo art being called photography. Today, with digital editing now possible to even the newest, entry level photographer, results can literally be "out of this world". Are scanner images considered photography? I have a friend who has some amazing floral shots using only a scanner and a black box to cut out light.
"The Fortuna" Example of modified High Key Photography
Photography comes from the Greek Phos (meaning light) and graphis (meaning stylus). Basically it means (to this day) writing with light. Now we mean here to capture light on a medium that is sensitive to that light.
Looking at the world in Unique ways . . . even common weeds become lovely.
Modern photographers run the gamut from experimental methods and tools to rigidly structured, unwavering studio shots on a single format requiring almost no thought for the photographer. They have ONE thing in common, for the most part, however. They want to capture, not unlike an artist who uses paint, a feeling, an image . . . an emotion. They want to present an image that conveys something about what they see and how they see it. They want to present their unique view of the world.
"Fieldwork" an example of modified light and tones.
So . . . if you have questions now is your chance. Welcome to "Ask the Photographer". I want to point out something I always say. If you really want to learn and improve you simply MUST get out there and shoot!
Please Note: I'm between hospitalized loved ones so may be lagging at times but will get around to everyone in time. Also, if I don't know something (nobody knows everything) I will likely ask one of my many photographer friends! Instead of "I don't know" you're likely to get an "I'll find out"!
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 106
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Well, thanks Photographer Darling.
I'd ask why do all my photos suck but that's probably too general a question.
As far as equipment goes what do you prefer? What to do you use?
I'll be looking for a new camera in the near future and I've already got some priorities, but is there out there, that stands out?
I'm beyond amateur.
Equipment really depends on personal taste and subject matter to some extent. While I used 35mm Minolta during the film days it was when I converted to digital that I switched to Nikon for the DSLR. Point and shoots are all pretty good now and I use them seldom, if ever, but always keep an Olympus (no particular reason for THAT choice). Nikon lovers like myself seem fiercely loyal to their brand but in truth Canon has an amazing product too. Right now I switched to the Nikon D200 because I needed the 5 frames per second sequence shots for nature shots involving rapidly moving animals, like birds in flight. It also allows a locked on continuous focus plane, subject based. Introductory DSLR (IMO) would be a Nikon D50 if you can still find one (we have a couple) . . . . I've never heard ONE complaint about that camera.
A lot will depend on how serious and commited you are. If you're sure you'll be shooting for a while then you might want a larger initial investment that will take considerable time to outgrow . . . perhaps a Nikon D80. A Nikon D40x is popular now, but is a bit of a beginner camera to see if this is for you without requiring too large an initial investment; my son went this route.
Canon also some has top quality stuff out there. Their intro, the Rebel (EOS 1000D) has gotten some good feedback . . . and like Nikon, qualities and enhancements along a whole spectrum based on how much one is willing to pay.
I WILL caution you not to worry too much about the sensor size. People were on that kick for some time thinking bigger is better but MOST people never even PRINT their shots and those that do don't make them into posters. Even most point and clicks can make decent 8 x 10s to 11 x 14s so forget bells and whistles and keep ONE thought in mind. A DSLR is only as good as the lens you use. Good Glass is more important than most realize . . . and the kit lenses they come with, with very few exceptions, are thrown in for a reason! :)
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
I won't be needing faster shutter speeds, my area will be architectural and landscape photography. Go look at my images section and you'll have an idea what I can do with what I have, which is a Fuji A201. It's what was available to me at the time and now I've outgrown it in more ways than one. I use to have a very old 35mm CANON SLR when I was a teen and a Brownie too. I think I'm more of intermediate amateur shutterbug.
Melinda, I actually do get asked that a lot. Generally, I recommend PS Elements, you can even find great deals on older versions and I've used every version up to and including the current one. I recommend it BECAUSE it's essentially a stripped down (far less expensive) Photo Shop with all the necessary tools. If you learn this program you can comfortably get tips, directions, ideas and steps from most photographers. If you expand or eventually get a more advanced version, there's NO need to relearn anything.
I've some friends who use the Paint Shop Pro and swear by it. Picasa is great for free but it's limited. I use, also, CaptureNx which works on any digital image and runs around $100 . . . but they give you a free 30 day trial to see if you like it first. It will very effectively edit a photo for you but is not for "special effects" and can't even add a frame (which I'm not too big on anyway). I also have and use photo Explosion Deluxe which runs less than $50 but has lot's of special effects and projects (calendars, post cards, etc.) . . . . fairly easy to learn. I've outgrown it a tad but it was fun. IT just doesn't translate into anything morte than what it is . . . and you'll be HARD pressed to finad anyone asking for or offering advice on it.
(Thanks, btw . . . I'm feeling hopeful for tomorrow and so far so good)!
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Depends on the angle and the POV and it's subjective . . . I could take a photo of someone at one angle that makes them look huge . . . at another that makes them look tall . . . it's about perspective. Usually, it's not the camera doing the lying! :P
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
What is that "during the film days" stuff. I still use and love my Minolta Maxxum 7000i. Yeah, the film displays in the stores are pitiful these days. I use it mostly, but when I have something I want to get quick on gather, I use a cheapo digital, so please don't harrass my photos too much, it's the equipment, not me. And I'm too cheap to buy a good digital camera, gather points aren't worth THAT much.
Are you leaving me a camera in your will, you handsome devil?
I hope all family members are going to be well soon.
Question: Do you think that frames around images help or hurt? I've seen some on Gather that I like, and a lot that I think detract from the image.
But this camera (and all the cameras I've had since) are wasted on me. For some reason, even with autofocus digital cameras, my images stink.
Does one need a photography gene? Or am I just a mutant?
is it best to sedate active monsters to get quality pics of them or should one just threaten them with a big stick?
I've seen top notch, sale quality work from a cell phone camera. Not buying the excuses. :P As for WHAT you get in the will . . . behave or I'll put another bill in your stack! :)
Flit any camera with a pre-set Macro (or Micro) setting will cut the aperture dramatically to really reduce the DOF (depth of field) so the focus on the subject will have a blurry background (BG) and foreground (FG) forcing attention on the subject. Think of it as a close-up setting which requires motionless shooting since ANY motion will blur a lot. Try getting real real close to the center of flowers or bugs (not TOO close, you need to focus) and checking the results. There's NO teacher better than experience. Learn what it can and cannot do by hands on applications.
Ahh Lance . . . I see. Let's get this clear for any that might be confused. SLR is single lens reflex. They usually have interchangeable lenses, but not always. Here's the deal. In an SLR camera, you look through a viewfinder and mirrors really allow you to look through the lens itself. When the release is pushed, the mirror lifts and the image you were looking at is saved. NON-SLR cameras have a viewfinder with a "window" in the front. You'r looking through a glass tunnel, not through the lens.
With an SLR, dirt on the lens, or a lenscap, would be obvious. Without one you could take a photo without noticing the lenscap was on or your thumb was in the shot! :P
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
It's more than ok . . . a little . . . umm . . . rugged which is good though, IMO, a tad overpriced. the 2.1 works for shots most people would want it for though won't allow extreme blow-ups (you weren't planning on posters? LoL!).
You CAN get decent shots with that . . . I have a 1.3 mp point and shoot myself. I would say to join the intense Photo Challenge Group I have where we're trying to learn more. The camera you have has a macro setting too and would allow you to do well to participate in the current project.
This brings up something previously not mentioned . . . digital zoom vs. optical zoom. This is confusing to a LOT of people and your camera has both. Digital zoom is the same thing you can do on a computer in editing. Basically cropping an image and enlarging what remains. This can lead to pixelation and something referred to as "artifacts". Digital zoom is not, really, a zoom. It's a portional enlargement and I doubt seriously if any new cameras being made don't have this feature. Up to 3x digital zoom can easily be done after the shot and on the computer giving better control of WHAT gets cropped.
Optical Zoom is the real thing. The camera zooms by lens setting . . . NOT by image blow-up. If you use the Optical zoom, you'll eliminate the error potential in a digital zoom . . . and THEN . . . you can ADD the digital zoom in editing to the extent you need. I would use the 2x optical over the digital faced with the choice you have. Just sayin'!
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
i tried in photoshop to take out the yellow to no avail. any suggestions on how i should photograph this to make it work?
Almost without exception, I think they detract from the image and are often used TO distract the eye from substandard images. A 1 to 2 mm black line (or White for a black image) is all the border you need to define and image. Some magazines insist on NO border, not even the 1mm line. I might add that an exception can be made for compiled compositions (more than one image combined, but kept separate). Great question and I think to much attention to borders is one of the most common mistakes made by beginners. That and too large a signature.....copyright notice. Overall Ada . . . I think it best to avoid anything extravagant.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Does the fact that my ex never would show up on any of the photos I tried to take of her prove that she was of the "undead"? And if so, should I have pled that in my divorce papers?
Thank you,
Frustrated in Pittsburgh
That said, the size is deceptive and this is a professional camera. There's no "gene" involved, my friend. People assume auto-focus translates into point and shoot . . . and that's just not so. Your subject should be sharply focused but there is more to consider. Aperture, shutter speed, light metering . . . while user-friendly, the camera you have is far from an automatic camera.
I'd consider learning the basics . . . perhaps even getting a less expensive digital, Olympus which would be one with interchangeable lenses for the OM2 . . . but I'd likely leave the Olympus market and strike out fresh with Canon (say a Rebel) or Nikon (D-80) . . . or get the point and shoot . . . (Nikon Coolpix, etc.) . . . they seem to dominate the market and would be easier for parts, service, etc. Hnag on to that OM2 though . . . that's cool stuff and you CAN learn it well!
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
*Sigh*
You can't fix it; I know it's operator error.
I'll slink back to my corner now.
Neither Grems! I've always thought candids did the best for capturing the true "monster-ocity" you seek. Sedation, while seemingly the answer . . . appears to raise eyebrows amongst "the (know-it-all) authorities" and you get the vibrance and life often associated with your better zombie movies. Nature's sedatives have a more realistic slowing effect . . . a full meal . . . a busy day . . . there's a twilight opportunity zone between fun and exhaustive breakdown (followed by sleep). Threats have limited appeal . . . unless you get creative. Raising a golf club and threatening to whack the kids with it scarcely brought a smile to their faces . . . but when I threatened to whack the goober lovin' be-Jesus out their goober loving Mom . . . well . . . couldn't get THOSE smiles off with sandpaper! :P
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
The majority of people don't keep or make prints. And you CAN learn!!! :)
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Can I ask another question? How the HELL does ANYONE EVER get a picture of lightening?
I experimented with a couple of settings that I thought might work on my camera... the fireworks one and so on .... but the only way I was able to get anything at all was with video. I can do fireworks ...but lightening is impossible
Not unique in today's world Ann! Look into this:
"Adobe Photoshop 5.0 Classroom in a Book" (Paperback)
As low as .70 cents used, online (Amazon) . . . the manual that SHOULD have come with the program! A classroom in a book written for the amateur (or experienced amateur in easily understandable language! :)
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
I like Nikon Coolpix (there's a variety for you to select from) or a Canon powershot (also a variety) . . . You should be able to find a quality camera from every price range with those names . . . all, essentially, excellent.
Ginger, eh? Hmmmm.
Regards,
Unkie D. <~~~~~
Photoshop should be able to do it too, if you have an accurate selection properly feathered using the hue shift function under color adjustments, not replace color . . . Also, add the adjustment layer (color enhancement hue/shift Sat) to the layers palette and work on that, not the image . . . and then check the dropdown . . . it will have options like "overlay" . . . check through them and see what gets close. . . . then check the opacity slider to balance the layer after simplifying it. I'm at work without the programs but if you have any problems let me know. (And look into captureNX). :)
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
"Does the fact that my ex never would show up on any of the photos I tried to take of her prove that she was of the "undead"? "
I'm assuming this is not a lens cap issue. You can tell if ANYTHING else showed up! :P
"And if so, should I have pled that in my divorce papers?"
Oh . . . HELL no! The courts are notoriously in FAVOR of the undead . . . . they seek "braaaaains" making the courts safe and, as undead, they seem to avoid . . . ummm . . . getting drunk and partying. They also, by definition, do not "wake the dead" Nah . . . keep it under your hat . . . NOW . . . if child custody is an issue . . . . different story. Also, given a chance, get shots of her bringing . . . Oh . . . I dunno . . . peanuts, a beer, a butcher knife . . . floating stuff sells well to tabloids . . . especially if you have 'Blue Suede Shoe" and get a banana / peanut butter smell! :P
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
GREAT question Flit! Marny and I both have done it. I set the exposure and a 30 sec to 1 minute shutter speed . . . during the weather where lightening HAS been (don't believe the old myth - it WILL strike twice). Set manual focus for the distance and use a remote or cable release . . . or self portrait timer might work but you cannot touch the camera to take such a long shot . . . then take it over and over. The advantage to the one minute or more shutter speed is that each & every lightening bolt will all appear in the ONE photo! The trick is to compose the shot so the shot would be good without the lightning . . . but towards the incoming storm. No flash or artificial lighting, of course . . . . :)
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
tripod sure does make a HUGE difference
You're right that from the distance with subdued lighting a flash will illuminate the wrong area and further reduce the effect you really seek which is to make the people on stage look good (and be visible). The picture of mine I reference is during a recital where no flash photography at all was permitted. I was seated about 30 rows back.
Without the flash (and often with changing light on the stage) you'll have to get a slower shutter speed which will add grain depending on the capabilities of the camera. The slower speed will also accent even the most minute movement of the camera . . . you'll likely need better equipment or . . . well . . . stop being wimpy. Get up there and get the shots . . . buying a bigger, better camera doesn't mean they have any more rights than you do. In fact, if their cameras can do it they can move to the back . . . if not . . . then they're no better at all! I've done this and it WAS hard to get brave and just walk to the spot I wanted but you get in there, get a shot or three, and then head back. Most people really don't care. It DOES get easier to do once you realize how accepted it is. :)
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
What kind of camera would you reccommend for an aspiring peeping tom?"
Well Monkey, it really depends on the type of peeping you refer to. For example, to shoot through cracks in curtains from a distance I always use a 500mm . . . umm . . . I mean I've heard you can get great shots with a Canon 40D or Nikon 200 with a 500mm lens and (maybe) a 2x teleconverter. This should really prevent any arresting or getting beaten up as you can get your shot from a Looooong way away.
You get VERY bad results with a point a click. Keep in mind, when shooting from outside in the dark through window glass to a lighted interior . . . don't use the flash! Not only would you be seen by everyone, but you'll get reflections and not images of the inside. :)
Incidentally, the shoe camera can get you in trouble . . . Link! But you said Peeper which is somewhat less disgusting than that guy.
There's a lot of spy cameras out there . . . just google it. So . . . what time do you want me to do naked Tai Chi with curtains slightly open? Say 10ish? I'll leave a beer in the bushes! :P
Well Child Protective Services told me that the cattle prod was not acceptable but then it always tended to curl their hair too . . . bribery has limited results and reinforces the recalcitrance in the long run too . . . I have found acting like a loon and shocking them with idiocy does help. I've also allowed them to take MY photo first . . . and made faces. Then when I shoot them I use a red eye preflash (flash only) and they make a face THEN I shoot while they're laughing at me stamp me feet in mock frustration. Basically, be creative . . . who can't make a kid laugh?
Incidentally, you can get some FANTASTIC shots from kids when they don't laugh or smile too. Check THIS of my grandaughter, Jenna!
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
"I know from personal experience that no amount of photoshop or post processing can fix a bad photo. "
That's SO true. In fact, ANY visible photoshop work will get you cut from some publications. More often than not amateurs will tend to try to do too much. Some try to cover up mistakes or add something to distract the viewer from the poor quality. It's a MUCH better idea to re-shoot if possible, or move on if not. :)
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
What is modified High Key Photography? That photo is beautiful.
You are right. I may not be a great photographer but I so want to capture and share the beauty of what I see around me. It's like a hunger I can't quite feed, an itch I can't scratch. Before I had a decent camera or better skills, it was driving me crazy trying to portray these things. Some do it with other arts, music or writing.
My image is High Key because it was overexposed so that there would be no horizon line . . . and modified because I added a whitish green tinge to the overall image. (And thank you for the compliment)!
"...it was driving me crazy trying to portray these things. Some do it with other arts, music or writing. "
Art is addictive . . . and photography IS art . . . to a photographer! :)
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Non Serious Question:
Why do people walk up to you (and into your shot) and ask "Is that a camera?" pointing with their head at the "dumb dog look" angle?
Serious Questions:
I pretty much just mess around with my camera. I generally have no set plan as to what I am doing, I play with the settings and if the shot turns out good I keep it lol
So what I really want to know is what is the function of, and best application of these two settings on my Lumix dmc fz8
aperture priority vs shutter priority.
Also in easy to understand n00b language, what is shooting RAW I keep hearing it, and apparently my camera can do it (if i poke it long enough maybe I can figure out how LOL), but what is it, when is it best used etc and so on :D
Aren't you sorry you asked ;)
Hope your loved ones get well soon!
I take pills for that, Doyle.
LoL! No idea. My first thought was you should step OUT of the asylum before shooting but then I realized that maybe I never experience that because people just avoid "the creepy-looking guy in trenchcoat"! :P I'd probably just tell them it's a high tech PEZ dispenser with a retina reading security protection device installed next to the cornea recognition software. :P
"So what I really want to know is what is the function of, and best application of these two settings on my Lumix dmc fz8
aperture priority vs shutter priority."
Ok . . . the aperture setting (for those that may not know) is really just how wide the iris opens on the lens. Aperture priority means that you can adjust the aperture you want and the shutter speed will adapt to the aperture you've selected by attempting to get a shutter speed that allows proper exposure for the setting. Watching the light meter to make sure you get the exposure really helps or the image may suffer. Shutter priority works the opposite. YOU set the shutter speed and the camera tries to open the lens so that the exposure is perfect. Again, you need to watch the meter a tad, because there is a limit to aperture and shutter speed so it IS possible to set one or the other so it can't be balanced.
I have more on this subject . . . but I need to take a break here for stOOpid work . . . I'll be back!
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
My main problem is technical stuff. No kidding. I know what aperture, shutter, ASA all that stuff IS but my head starts hurting if I try to figure it out to shoot. I don't like numbers. I either get a good shot on location or play with it in photoshop. Okay - I need to have a somewhat decent composistion and lighting first.
I think I need to join a camera club in my area. I'm a hands on kind of person. I've read lots of books and articles, including my camera manual but it's all Greek to me until I actually physically DO it. Then it clicks. Make sense?
Thought I'd give you a laugh---I was one of those pooh-poohed upon semi-professional wedding photographers. Before you fall over ROFLYourAO, I only ever had one complaint. Just one. And I still hate her. :o)
To make this a tad more simple . . . the aperture controls the DOF. The focal plane gets much more narrow, with more blur in front and behind the subject the lower the F/stop (which makes the iris wider) the less area in focus. Good to know, eh?
Shutter speed controls stopping motion . . . or allowing it. For sports, a fast shutter can freeze a flying drop of sweat from a track runner, a bird or bee in flight or each individual droplet in a waterfall. It can also smooth out flowing water in a stream of waterfall (you've seen numerous exaples of silk like flowing water no doubt) by slowing the speed.
By learning what does what, you can make more informed decisions in the field. A camera club is great for inspiration and social networking with people of similar interests. I can also direct you to what I consider to be a far better learning site for photographers only (free) if you're interested. I certainly think your ready to "step it up" a bit.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
"what is shooting RAW I keep hearing it, and apparently my camera can do it (if i poke it long enough maybe I can figure out how LOL), but what is it, when is it best used etc and so on :D"
RAW keeps ALL the sensor data in the camera. It takes a LOT more memory. Jpg converts the data and eliminates forever what they don't use. Your white balance, for example, is chosen by setting or on auto. You cannot later change it. You can't adapt exposure because the camera or user selected one and all alternatives were lost when the shot was recorded.
On RAW, I can open the image, see that it is to dark or light, and change the exposure up or down several F/stops to the ideal setting. You have ALL the data the camera can record . . . but you pay a HUGE price in memory size. I use external hard drives to save mine. 4 Gigbytes can store about 200 images.
Does THAT help?
"Hope your loved ones get well soon! "
Thank you. Marlyce will be fine. Regretfully, my Dad is terminal.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
I take pills for that, Doyle. "
you're damndable cute! :P
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Bravest damn occupation I ever heard of! You literally couldn't pay me to do that (and I've been asked). Too many people find that to be the only priceless, irreplacebale moments of their lives.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
I used to use a Minolta film camera. It was semi - auto, I think. I went by the pictures/icons more than the numbers.
BTW - I tried to slow the water at the beach once using the shutter speed but I guess my camera overrode it with the aperature. Live and learn.
I may know the site you are referring to. If you would, please email it to me. Thanks. :-)
Aperture does not override shutter speed if you're on shutter priority. Incidentally, shoot when the waves are all the way in and on their way out! Whole different shot than shooting at any other point!
Roy . . . tripod is required but guaranteed to work. If your camera has NR . . . put in on! When ALL set . . . make sure the camera is OFF auto anything! :)
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
That really helps me understand what RAW is, I may play with it soon. . . I have a whole week of vacation next week to play :)
(and sorry about your father, I hope he has as good of an outlook one can have in such a difficult time)
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0705/07050703canons5is.asp
The NR CAN be done in post editing too.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
I just came back to clear up the semi-professional thing. The semi is that I'm too damn nice and let some people have their pics without paying me first. Yeah, never did get paid.
No kidding, over a hundred weddings and only one complaint. I think I'll hunt her down tomorrow. You are da man!!!
Whoa! Tip o' the hat at ya! Meant every damn word . . . really!
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
bookmarking this too so i can go back and analize it again later.
Regards,
Unkie D <~~~~~
Regards,
Doyel I <~~~~~
I have a Canon Powershot SD800.
Hi Shannon! Not a bad choice in cameras. I personally cannot have no choice in setting aperture or shutter speed, but many prefer to have the camera do this for them initially. You'll find that due to that this camera will easily blow-out highlights (overexpose bright areas) . The wide angle, the 3x optical (not digital) and the image stabilization which allows you to shoot crystal clear shots while zoomed and off tripod are great features! Your red shift problem (purples showing blue suggest a hue shift off the red) is not just a problem with your particular camera alone. Some of the reviews specifically mention that the reds tend to shift towards pink, and in a purple (red + blue) that will accent the blues. See This Review!. You can easily deal with the shift with various editing programs by dropping the blue saturation a tad, then increasing overall saturation back up . . . or by simply increasing the red saturation . . . or a combination of the two. Light level adjustments on red only might also rectify the issues and would be the FIRST thing to try. It's simply a trial and error look which would vary from shot to shot, so it's not formulaic. Unfortunately, there's simply no setting for this . . . but that camera can take some amazing close-ups!
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
BTW, the other free choice in photo editors is the GIMP. It's open source software available at sourceforge.net. Like a lot of open source stuff it has it's own way of doing things but it is as powerful as anything less than Photoshop.
GIMP is an acronym for GNU Image Processor. GNU is an acronym for GNU's not UNIX. This is hacker humor. Hackers are people who program for fun, not people who steal credit card numbers. They tend to have a taste for bad puns and gags that incorporate infinite recursion.
I don't think I have ever asked you what your opinion on Panasonic is. I've got a Lumix. . . Paul has one. . .Mom has one LOL We're a panasonic crew ;)
Thanks for the tip on GIMP Nippy . . . never heard of it so even I get to learn new stuff! (I did warn everyone I don't know it all)!
Rangefinding digicams are out there. Leica M8 is an awesome one. A quick check shows also the Epson R-D1. Canon's EOS 10D finally movede us all past the "highend" rangefinder" models such as the Olympus C5050, Canon G3, and the Nikon Coolpix 5000 . . . both in quality and price.
Don't tell me you're thinking os switching? ;)
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
https://www.abesofmaine.com/item.do?item=NKD602LK&l=CJ#top