Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Looking for Equipment Recommendations - Hawaii

Tags:
Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
September 3, 2005 9:14:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I am planning a 2-week trip to Hawaii around January. I have a Canon
EOS Rebel G 35 mm camera; a 35-80 mm kit lens; an EF 28-135 mm IS USM
lens; a Velbon El Carmagne 540 tripod; a Minolta DiMage G500 5 MP
digital camera; and a Canon ZR60 miniDV video camera. I plan to visit 7
of the 8 main Hawaiian group islands (I have the option to add the
remaining island, but I don't know that I want to spend another $350
for it). I want to photograph as much of the islands as I can (mostly
landscape shots and close-up nature shots), from many different angles.
I plan to spend at most 3 days on any single island.

I expect that I will need a zoom lens and a wide-angle lens. How much
zoom would be useful? Would 300 mm have much use in Hawaii? How about
500 mm? I saw a 500 mm "mirrored lens" (?) zoom lens at Wolf Camera,
but I don't know how it is designed to be used; I would prefer image
stabilized lenses.

What is the best way to carry photographic equipment? Is a backpack or
a duffel bag more useful?

What film speeds are best? I am thinking of shooting with Velvia film
($130 for 700 exposures from Wolf Camera), though the salesman warned
me that it is a very slow film (but beautiful if used in bright light
with a tripod or IS lens).

My Canon Rebel G comes with mid-roll rewind. Does the use of that
feature sacrifice the unexposed remainder of the roll? If not, how
would I resume shooting where I had rewound?

I probably will pick up a disposable underwater camera, though I don't
forsee my spending very much time under water. If I try to shoehorn one
more major activity into this vacation, I might need a hospital stay
when I return. However, the local dive shop says I still have time to
become scuba certified. That, in addition to attending college, working
full time and planning and equipping myself for this trip.

Does anyone have any other equipment recommendations?

Thank you.
Anonymous
September 3, 2005 10:13:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

(PeteCresswell) wrote:
> Per pooua@aol.com:
> >Does anyone have any other equipment recommendations?
>
> Do you have a plan for offloading the digital camera's memory card - or just
> plenty of cards?

I forgot to mention that I have a MindStor PSS-1810. This is a 10 GB
file storage device that I have used on several trips. I have never
come close to filling it, even in a week of heavy picture-taking.

I have a 1 GB SD card in my camera, which should hold me for 2 or 3
days. I still need to get an adaptor so I can directly download my SD
card to my MindStor. My current adapter is for SmartMedia.
Anonymous
September 3, 2005 10:15:21 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

(PeteCresswell) wrote:
> Per (PeteCresswell):

> Also, be aware that stealing from tourists' rent-a-cars is de-facto legal - at
> least on Oahu.

Hmmm... I'm from Texas. We have our own way of handling thieves.

What are the gun laws in Hawaii?
Related resources
Anonymous
September 3, 2005 11:48:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

pooua@aol.com wrote:
> I am planning a 2-week trip to Hawaii around January. I have a Canon
> EOS Rebel G 35 mm camera; a 35-80 mm kit lens; an EF 28-135 mm IS USM
> lens; a Velbon El Carmagne 540 tripod; a Minolta DiMage G500 5 MP
> digital camera; and a Canon ZR60 miniDV video camera. I plan to visit 7
> of the 8 main Hawaiian group islands (I have the option to add the
> remaining island, but I don't know that I want to spend another $350
> for it). I want to photograph as much of the islands as I can (mostly
> landscape shots and close-up nature shots), from many different angles.
> I plan to spend at most 3 days on any single island.

Not sure that you need the 35-80 when you have a 28-135 IS lens....
For landscape, get a wider angle lens 17-35mm maybe.

> I expect that I will need a zoom lens and a wide-angle lens. How much
> zoom would be useful? Would 300 mm have much use in Hawaii? How about
> 500 mm? I saw a 500 mm "mirrored lens" (?) zoom lens at Wolf Camera,
> but I don't know how it is designed to be used; I would prefer image
> stabilized lenses.

Do not get a mirror lens. Unless you like halo's around all your
subjects. Get a Canon 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 EF IS. Good for close ups of
wildlife, but you won't miss a closer shot if the need arises. Possibly
the tamron 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical IF. Gets a little
fuzzy at the long end i've read, but all zooms do that a little, plus
it doesn't have IS.

> What is the best way to carry photographic equipment? Is a backpack or
> a duffel bag more useful?

Backpack.

> What film speeds are best? I am thinking of shooting with Velvia film
> ($130 for 700 exposures from Wolf Camera), though the salesman warned
> me that it is a very slow film (but beautiful if used in bright light
> with a tripod or IS lens).

If you're shooting outdoors, without action, this isn't a problem. For
landsacpes it's perfect. You'll need higher ISO for action shots. Kodak
HD 400 might do for an all around.

> My Canon Rebel G comes with mid-roll rewind. Does the use of that
> feature sacrifice the unexposed remainder of the roll? If not, how
> would I resume shooting where I had rewound?

Not sure on that one, but I imagine if it leaves the tip out so you can
rethread, youd just leave the lens cap on and then snap off until you
get to the right frame. If you don't know for sure, run a test before
you leave on some cheap film.

> Does anyone have any other equipment recommendations?
>
> Thank you.

Maybe sell your Rebel G and Dimaage and get a Canon 300d? They're down
to $650 at B&H.

I think I remember another thread where you wanted to sell photos.
RebelXT or 20d are a good choice, but more money of course.
Anonymous
September 4, 2005 12:44:28 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Digital Cameras don't use film. Maybe you should try a film group for your
film questions?
<pooua@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1125792849.479761.306000@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I am planning a 2-week trip to Hawaii around January. I have a Canon
> EOS Rebel G 35 mm camera; a 35-80 mm kit lens; an EF 28-135 mm IS USM
> lens; a Velbon El Carmagne 540 tripod; a Minolta DiMage G500 5 MP
> digital camera; and a Canon ZR60 miniDV video camera. I plan to visit 7
> of the 8 main Hawaiian group islands (I have the option to add the
> remaining island, but I don't know that I want to spend another $350
> for it). I want to photograph as much of the islands as I can (mostly
> landscape shots and close-up nature shots), from many different angles.
> I plan to spend at most 3 days on any single island.
>
> I expect that I will need a zoom lens and a wide-angle lens. How much
> zoom would be useful? Would 300 mm have much use in Hawaii? How about
> 500 mm? I saw a 500 mm "mirrored lens" (?) zoom lens at Wolf Camera,
> but I don't know how it is designed to be used; I would prefer image
> stabilized lenses.
>
> What is the best way to carry photographic equipment? Is a backpack or
> a duffel bag more useful?
>
> What film speeds are best? I am thinking of shooting with Velvia film
> ($130 for 700 exposures from Wolf Camera), though the salesman warned
> me that it is a very slow film (but beautiful if used in bright light
> with a tripod or IS lens).
>
> My Canon Rebel G comes with mid-roll rewind. Does the use of that
> feature sacrifice the unexposed remainder of the roll? If not, how
> would I resume shooting where I had rewound?
>
> I probably will pick up a disposable underwater camera, though I don't
> forsee my spending very much time under water. If I try to shoehorn one
> more major activity into this vacation, I might need a hospital stay
> when I return. However, the local dive shop says I still have time to
> become scuba certified. That, in addition to attending college, working
> full time and planning and equipping myself for this trip.
>
> Does anyone have any other equipment recommendations?
>
> Thank you.
>
September 4, 2005 3:36:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Per pooua@aol.com:
>Does anyone have any other equipment recommendations?

Do you have a plan for offloading the digital camera's memory card - or just
plenty of cards?
--
PeteCresswell
September 4, 2005 3:56:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Per (PeteCresswell):
>Do you have a plan for...

Also, be aware that stealing from tourists' rent-a-cars is de-facto legal - at
least on Oahu.
--
PeteCresswell
Anonymous
September 4, 2005 6:53:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote in message
news:iozSe.987

>> When I was there, I used my 16-35 wide and 70-200 IS more than any others
>> on my Canon 10D.
>> The lens that sat on my camera the most was the wide.
>> I also had a 100mm macro, 50mm f1.4, and 28-135 IS.
>>
>> Definitely bring a wide, and a reasonably long tele (200mm or so) to
>> isolate landscape features from a distance.
>>
>> Here are a few pictures from my trip to Maui:
>> http://www.pbase.com/markuson/maui_2004
>> My 2 cents...
>> -Mark
>
> PS--
> If you're really going to 7 islands...make sure that you spend an ENTIRE
> day...or even both days...driving the road to Hana on
> Maui...BUT!!!!--Don't make the mistake of thinking that Hana itself is the
> attraction!! The photographic attraction is in making a hundred stops
> along the way, getting out to walk some short paths, etc. Hana is a
> dud...but the shots you'll find on the way are fantanstic.
> Most of the more interesting shots at the gallery I pointed to above were
> taken somewhere along the road to Haha...but the funny thing it that many
> people just drive by...trying to "get there" thinking Hana is some sort of
> prize. Trust me... It ain't no prize. :)  The treasure is along the
> road.
> -Mark

In fact... Now that I glance at my little gallery again...it turns out that
every picture except for the panorama and thd rowing boat were shot on the
Raod to Hana.
Make you don't miss it.
If you're not driving, though, be sure to pick up some dramamine if you're
the least bit sensitive to motion sickness. There are literally 100's of
hairpin turns.
Anonymous
September 4, 2005 9:01:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

pooua@aol.com wrote:
> I am planning a 2-week trip to Hawaii around January. I have a Canon
> EOS Rebel G 35 mm camera; a 35-80 mm kit lens; an EF 28-135 mm IS USM
> lens; a Velbon El Carmagne 540 tripod; a Minolta DiMage G500 5 MP
> digital camera; and a Canon ZR60 miniDV video camera. I plan to visit 7
> of the 8 main Hawaiian group islands (I have the option to add the
> remaining island, but I don't know that I want to spend another $350
> for it). I want to photograph as much of the islands as I can (mostly
> landscape shots and close-up nature shots), from many different angles.
> I plan to spend at most 3 days on any single island.
>
> I expect that I will need a zoom lens and a wide-angle lens. How much
> zoom would be useful? Would 300 mm have much use in Hawaii? How about
> 500 mm? I saw a 500 mm "mirrored lens" (?) zoom lens at Wolf Camera,
> but I don't know how it is designed to be used; I would prefer image
> stabilized lenses.
>
> What is the best way to carry photographic equipment? Is a backpack or
> a duffel bag more useful?
>
> What film speeds are best? I am thinking of shooting with Velvia film
> ($130 for 700 exposures from Wolf Camera), though the salesman warned
> me that it is a very slow film (but beautiful if used in bright light
> with a tripod or IS lens).
>
> My Canon Rebel G comes with mid-roll rewind. Does the use of that
> feature sacrifice the unexposed remainder of the roll? If not, how
> would I resume shooting where I had rewound?
>
> I probably will pick up a disposable underwater camera, though I don't
> forsee my spending very much time under water. If I try to shoehorn one
> more major activity into this vacation, I might need a hospital stay
> when I return. However, the local dive shop says I still have time to
> become scuba certified. That, in addition to attending college, working
> full time and planning and equipping myself for this trip.
>
> Does anyone have any other equipment recommendations?
>
> Thank you.
>
Well, first, you are in a digital photography group. You might want to
repost elsewhere.
Just take as many pictures as possible. I would recommend a zoom lens,
but remember that you will probably have to CARRY it some, so take into
consideration.
Have a good time, Hawaii is a photographer's paradise.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
September 4, 2005 9:01:48 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

pooua@aol.com wrote:
> (PeteCresswell) wrote:
>> Per (PeteCresswell):
>
>> Also, be aware that stealing from tourists' rent-a-cars is de-facto legal - at
>> least on Oahu.
>
> Hmmm... I'm from Texas. We have our own way of handling thieves.
>
> What are the gun laws in Hawaii?
>
About what you expect in a socialist welfare state.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
September 4, 2005 2:14:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

You have paid for a trip to paradise and you plan to take a lot of photos so
you can see what fun you might have had if you were not some nut with a
camera? I spent a week once taking pictures of tourists taking pictures in
Venice...I enjoyed the city far more than they.

You have planned too much. Take a small kit. A backpack so you can hike
would be nice...but have fun and if something presents itself take some time
to get a great shot rather than shooting everything.

--
Thanks,
Gene Palmiter
(visit my photo gallery at http://palmiter.dotphoto.com)
freebridge design group
www.route611.com & Route 611 Magazine
<pooua@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1125792849.479761.306000@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I am planning a 2-week trip to Hawaii around January. I have a Canon
> EOS Rebel G 35 mm camera; a 35-80 mm kit lens; an EF 28-135 mm IS USM
> lens; a Velbon El Carmagne 540 tripod; a Minolta DiMage G500 5 MP
> digital camera; and a Canon ZR60 miniDV video camera. I plan to visit 7
> of the 8 main Hawaiian group islands (I have the option to add the
> remaining island, but I don't know that I want to spend another $350
> for it). I want to photograph as much of the islands as I can (mostly
> landscape shots and close-up nature shots), from many different angles.
> I plan to spend at most 3 days on any single island.
>
> I expect that I will need a zoom lens and a wide-angle lens. How much
> zoom would be useful? Would 300 mm have much use in Hawaii? How about
> 500 mm? I saw a 500 mm "mirrored lens" (?) zoom lens at Wolf Camera,
> but I don't know how it is designed to be used; I would prefer image
> stabilized lenses.
>
> What is the best way to carry photographic equipment? Is a backpack or
> a duffel bag more useful?
>
> What film speeds are best? I am thinking of shooting with Velvia film
> ($130 for 700 exposures from Wolf Camera), though the salesman warned
> me that it is a very slow film (but beautiful if used in bright light
> with a tripod or IS lens).
>
> My Canon Rebel G comes with mid-roll rewind. Does the use of that
> feature sacrifice the unexposed remainder of the roll? If not, how
> would I resume shooting where I had rewound?
>
> I probably will pick up a disposable underwater camera, though I don't
> forsee my spending very much time under water. If I try to shoehorn one
> more major activity into this vacation, I might need a hospital stay
> when I return. However, the local dive shop says I still have time to
> become scuba certified. That, in addition to attending college, working
> full time and planning and equipping myself for this trip.
>
> Does anyone have any other equipment recommendations?
>
> Thank you.
>
September 4, 2005 4:02:35 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Per pooua@aol.com:
>Hmmm... I'm from Texas. We have our own way of handling thieves.
>
>What are the gun laws in Hawaii?

Moot. You won't be there when it happens.
--
PeteCresswell
September 4, 2005 6:32:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
news:kCzSe.22364$ih4.11249@fe02.lga...
> pooua@aol.com wrote:
>> (PeteCresswell) wrote:
>>> Per (PeteCresswell):
>>
>>> Also, be aware that stealing from tourists' rent-a-cars is de-facto
>>> legal - at
>>> least on Oahu.
>>
>> Hmmm... I'm from Texas. We have our own way of handling thieves.
>>
>> What are the gun laws in Hawaii?
>>
> About what you expect in a socialist welfare state.
>
>
> --
> Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net

Could you explain the connection between Gun Law and Socialist Welfare
State.

I think that the country with the most restrictive Gun Laws is Japan. Is it
a Socialist Welfare State?

Gun Laws seem to be non existant in Russia, is it a Right Wing Fascist
Country?

The only real connection between Gun Laws and real welfare issues seems to
have something to do with the number of deaths from Gunshot wounds.

Guess which Countries have the highest figures for that statistic. It is
those places with least restrictions on gun ownership. I know that is not
what the Gun Apologists tell the American people, but it is true.

In civilised countries the general population can rely upon the duly elected
Government, and the Police to protect them from armed thugs.

Roy G
September 4, 2005 6:52:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

<pooua@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1125792849.479761.306000@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I am planning a 2-week trip to Hawaii around January. I have a Canon
> EOS Rebel G 35 mm camera; a 35-80 mm kit lens; an EF 28-135 mm IS USM
> lens; a Velbon El Carmagne 540 tripod; a Minolta DiMage G500 5 MP
> digital camera; and a Canon ZR60 miniDV video camera. I plan to visit 7
> of the 8 main Hawaiian group islands (I have the option to add the
> remaining island, but I don't know that I want to spend another $350
> for it). I want to photograph as much of the islands as I can (mostly
> landscape shots and close-up nature shots), from many different angles.
> I plan to spend at most 3 days on any single island.
>
> I expect that I will need a zoom lens and a wide-angle lens. How much
> zoom would be useful? Would 300 mm have much use in Hawaii? How about
> 500 mm? I saw a 500 mm "mirrored lens" (?) zoom lens at Wolf Camera,
> but I don't know how it is designed to be used; I would prefer image
> stabilized lenses.
>
> What is the best way to carry photographic equipment? Is a backpack or
> a duffel bag more useful?
>
> What film speeds are best? I am thinking of shooting with Velvia film
> ($130 for 700 exposures from Wolf Camera), though the salesman warned
> me that it is a very slow film (but beautiful if used in bright light
> with a tripod or IS lens).
>
> My Canon Rebel G comes with mid-roll rewind. Does the use of that
> feature sacrifice the unexposed remainder of the roll? If not, how
> would I resume shooting where I had rewound?
>
> I probably will pick up a disposable underwater camera, though I don't
> forsee my spending very much time under water. If I try to shoehorn one
> more major activity into this vacation, I might need a hospital stay
> when I return. However, the local dive shop says I still have time to
> become scuba certified. That, in addition to attending college, working
> full time and planning and equipping myself for this trip.
>
> Does anyone have any other equipment recommendations?
>
> Thank you.
>

I get the impression from your question and some of your responses that you
are an inexperienced photographer.

I would suggest that for the meantime, you should stick with the equipment
you already have.

Take as many pictures as you can, but give some thought to them before you
press the shutter button.

What am I trying to achieve with this picture?
What is the main subject of this picture? and is there anything which
detracts from that subject?
Does it have interesting Composition? and / or Colour toning or contrast?.

Once you see the results, then try and compare what you thought originally,
with what the picture really looks like now. Ask yourself "What could I
have done to make it better or more interesting"

It is often very helpfull to wait for a few weeks before going through this
process.

Once you really know what you want to do in photography, then you will
perhaps find that you NEED a certain piece of equipment to achieve it. If
you don't need it, then you will have more money to spend on going to
interesting places.

There is more different bits of kit out there waiting to have money spent on
it, than any one photographer could use in 20 lifetimes.

Roy G
Anonymous
September 4, 2005 9:04:32 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Roy wrote:
> "Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
> news:kCzSe.22364$ih4.11249@fe02.lga...
>> pooua@aol.com wrote:
>>> (PeteCresswell) wrote:
>>>> Per (PeteCresswell):
>>>> Also, be aware that stealing from tourists' rent-a-cars is de-facto
>>>> legal - at
>>>> least on Oahu.
>>> Hmmm... I'm from Texas. We have our own way of handling thieves.
>>>
>>> What are the gun laws in Hawaii?
>>>
>> About what you expect in a socialist welfare state.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
>
> Could you explain the connection between Gun Law and Socialist Welfare
> State.
>
> I think that the country with the most restrictive Gun Laws is Japan. Is it
> a Socialist Welfare State?
>
> Gun Laws seem to be non existant in Russia, is it a Right Wing Fascist
> Country?
>
> The only real connection between Gun Laws and real welfare issues seems to
> have something to do with the number of deaths from Gunshot wounds.
>
> Guess which Countries have the highest figures for that statistic. It is
> those places with least restrictions on gun ownership. I know that is not
> what the Gun Apologists tell the American people, but it is true.
>
> In civilised countries the general population can rely upon the duly elected
> Government, and the Police to protect them from armed thugs.
>
> Roy G
>
>
The countries with socialist welfare systems are the most restrictive of
gun ownership.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
September 5, 2005 10:17:22 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Mark² (lowest even number here) wrote:

> If you're really going to 7 islands...make sure that you spend an ENTIRE
> day...or even both days...driving the road to Hana on Maui...BUT!!!!--Don't
> make the mistake of thinking that Hana itself is the attraction!! The
> photographic attraction is in making a hundred stops along the way, getting
> out to walk some short paths, etc. Hana is a dud...but the shots you'll
> find on the way are fantanstic.
> Most of the more interesting shots at the gallery I pointed to above were
> taken somewhere along the road to Haha...but the funny thing it that many
> people just drive by...trying to "get there" thinking Hana is some sort of
> prize. Trust me... It ain't no prize. :)  The treasure is along the road.

I really appreciate that insight. I'll see what I can schedule with my
travel agent (my Mom, who is going with me on this trip).
Anonymous
September 5, 2005 10:20:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Mark² (lowest even number here) wrote:

[snip]

> In fact... Now that I glance at my little gallery again...it turns out that
> every picture except for the panorama and thd rowing boat were shot on the
> Raod to Hana.
> Make you don't miss it.
> If you're not driving, though, be sure to pick up some dramamine if you're
> the least bit sensitive to motion sickness. There are literally 100's of
> hairpin turns.

Good to know. I get motion sick on anything that moves. I do mean,
"anything." But, it's not so bad when I am driving, and I have grown
out of a lot of it since I hit middle age.
Anonymous
September 5, 2005 5:27:34 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

pooua@aol.com wrote:
> Mark² (lowest even number here) wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> In fact... Now that I glance at my little gallery again...it turns
>> out that every picture except for the panorama and thd rowing boat
>> were shot on the Raod to Hana.
>> Make you don't miss it.
>> If you're not driving, though, be sure to pick up some dramamine if
>> you're the least bit sensitive to motion sickness. There are
>> literally 100's of hairpin turns.
>
> Good to know. I get motion sick on anything that moves. I do mean,
> "anything." But, it's not so bad when I am driving, and I have grown
> out of a lot of it since I hit middle age.

Even my wife, who gets sick within moments of looking down as a passenger,
was OK.
I think it's because there was so much to look at that it kept her engaged.
Don't miss the drive...
Anonymous
September 5, 2005 6:06:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>> >Does anyone have any other equipment recommendations?
>>
>> Do you have a plan for offloading the digital camera's memory card - or just
>> plenty of cards?
>
>I forgot to mention that I have a MindStor PSS-1810. This is a 10 GB
>file storage device that I have used on several trips. I have never
>come close to filling it, even in a week of heavy picture-taking.


I would not leave all of my pictures on one device. For one thing,
you might lose it. More likely, it could fail or get stolen.

I would take the time at night to upload your photos to a website with
good backup facilities. If you can't do that, I would put the photos
on CD and mail the CD's to yourself.

-Joel

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free 35mm lens/digicam reviews: http://www.exc.com/photography
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous
September 5, 2005 6:14:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

pooua@aol.com wrote:
> Mark² (lowest even number here) wrote:

>> Definitely bring a wide, and a reasonably long tele (200mm or so) to
>> isolate landscape features from a distance.
>
> Great. I'll be checking around eBay for that sort of thing.

Here's an example of where the tele and wide come into play...
These two shots are from the same exact spot, but shot with wide...and tele:

Wide:
http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/36235046/original
Tele:
http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/36235044/original

It's amazing how useful a tele can be to isolate portions of a landscape.

>> Here are a few pictures from my trip to Maui:
>> http://www.pbase.com/markuson/maui_2004
>
> Nice pictures. I expect to take some like those. But, I wouldn't be
> spending $2k+ and going to Hawaii if all I wanted to do was take these
> kind of pictures.
>
> BTW, if that's you in some of those shots, I'll just say that I don't
> look like that...

That's me in the blut shirt and under the waterfall...
-I've become a bit more wimpy in the last year though...

Mark
Anonymous
September 5, 2005 6:20:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 9/5/05 8:17 AM, in article
1125926242.583977.178010@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com, "pooua@aol.com"
<pooua@aol.com> wrote:

> Mark² (lowest even number here) wrote:
>
>> If you're really going to 7 islands...make sure that you spend an ENTIRE
>> day...or even both days...driving the road to Hana on Maui...BUT!!!!--Don't
>> make the mistake of thinking that Hana itself is the attraction!! The
>> photographic attraction is in making a hundred stops along the way, getting
>> out to walk some short paths, etc. Hana is a dud...but the shots you'll
>> find on the way are fantanstic.
>> Most of the more interesting shots at the gallery I pointed to above were
>> taken somewhere along the road to Haha...but the funny thing it that many
>> people just drive by...trying to "get there" thinking Hana is some sort of
>> prize. Trust me... It ain't no prize. :)  The treasure is along the road.
>
> I really appreciate that insight. I'll see what I can schedule with my
> travel agent (my Mom, who is going with me on this trip).
>
Here is a second on recommending the road to Hana on Maui. It is possible
to go there and back in one day but start very early and plan on lots of
stops. One of those stops should be the black sand beach just outside of
Hana. The big island also has an excellent black sand beach on the south
end. Cramming 7 islands into your trip means that you are probably not
going to see much of the big island unless you spend most of your time there
as the big island really is - big!
Chuck
Anonymous
September 5, 2005 10:28:56 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

C Wright wrote:
> On 9/5/05 8:17 AM, in article
> 1125926242.583977.178010@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com, "pooua@aol.com"
> <pooua@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Mark² (lowest even number here) wrote:
> >
> >> If you're really going to 7 islands...make sure that you spend an ENTIRE
> >> day...or even both days...driving the road to Hana on Maui.

> > I really appreciate that insight. I'll see what I can schedule with my
> > travel agent (my Mom, who is going with me on this trip).
> >
> Here is a second on recommending the road to Hana on Maui.

OK, I checked with my Mom. She says,

"Because of the amount of time necessary for travel, we are going to
have to decide whether to go to Hana or Haleakala. Haleakala is a huge
- HUGE- crater which will have a lot of picture-taking points. But
going there, it will be just one location - HUGE- while going on the
road to Hana, you will have a lot of changes in scenery. Both are good
photo areas."

She missed the part about the hairpin turns, I guess.

Repetitive motions (like constantly turning) tend to make me ill. I
wonder if Haleakala has many sharp turns?
September 5, 2005 11:14:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>
>PS--
>If you're really going to 7 islands...make sure that you spend an ENTIRE
>day...or even both days...driving the road to Hana on Maui...BUT!!!!--Don't
>make the mistake of thinking that Hana itself is the attraction!! The
>photographic attraction is in making a hundred stops along the way, getting
>out to walk some short paths, etc. Hana is a dud...but the shots you'll
>find on the way are fantanstic.
>Most of the more interesting shots at the gallery I pointed to above were
>taken somewhere along the road to Haha...but the funny thing it that many
>people just drive by...trying to "get there" thinking Hana is some sort of
>prize. Trust me... It ain't no prize. :)  The treasure is along the road.
>-Mark

Mark,

I agree completely. Just the pools and beaches along the way should take two
days. Then, gas up, eat a good lunch, and drive on PAST Hana, as much more
awaits down the road.

Over the last 20 years, I limit myself to one island/week min. and always
could have found much more to shoot on each.

As the OP is going to recreate some of his/her childhood, and photography is
really a second-thought, I'm with you on a few wide-angles, or even WA zooms,
and leave the big-guns at home. Their back will appreciate it.

Hunt
Anonymous
September 6, 2005 1:41:33 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

pooua@aol.com wrote:
> C Wright wrote:
>> On 9/5/05 8:17 AM, in article
>> 1125926242.583977.178010@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com,
>> "pooua@aol.com" <pooua@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Mark² (lowest even number here) wrote:
>>>
>>>> If you're really going to 7 islands...make sure that you spend an
>>>> ENTIRE day...or even both days...driving the road to Hana on Maui.
>
>>> I really appreciate that insight. I'll see what I can schedule with
>>> my travel agent (my Mom, who is going with me on this trip).
>>>
>> Here is a second on recommending the road to Hana on Maui.
>
> OK, I checked with my Mom. She says,
>
> "Because of the amount of time necessary for travel, we are going to
> have to decide whether to go to Hana or Haleakala. Haleakala is a huge
> - HUGE- crater which will have a lot of picture-taking points. But
> going there, it will be just one location - HUGE- while going on the
> road to Hana, you will have a lot of changes in scenery. Both are good
> photo areas."
>
> She missed the part about the hairpin turns, I guess.
>
> Repetitive motions (like constantly turning) tend to make me ill. I
> wonder if Haleakala has many sharp turns?

If you go to Haleakala...
I suggest the opposite of what everyone else seems to suggest:
Everyone will tell you to go for the sunRISE.
If you see the sun through the low clouds, I'm sure it's pretty, but the
crater itself will appear fairly colorless/lifeless.
But if you're there when the sun is just about to set...
....You get this:
(and although this is three stitched shots, the individual portions are
almost exactly as they came out of the camera!). It had recently rained and
cleared the air of haze, which also (I assume) brightened the rock a bit:
http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/36134121/original
The rocks were incredibly colorful and crisp with the low, late afternoon
sunlight shining on them from almost dierctly behind me.

Bret (Annika) shot the same crater in the *morning*, but as a result, the
crater (by no fault of his own) is back-lit and boring. It also appeared
that there was a lot of haze the day he was there.
Here's Bret's shot:
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/36568910


Personally, I find the sun-SET shot far more compelling than the famous
sunrise everyone tells you to see...especially color-wise.
-Mark
September 6, 2005 2:34:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Gene Palmiter" <palmiter_gene@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:UNzSe.6962$Sx4.245@trnddc06...
> You have paid for a trip to paradise and you plan to take a lot of photos
> so you can see what fun you might have had if you were not some nut with a
> camera? I spent a week once taking pictures of tourists taking pictures in
> Venice...I enjoyed the city far more than they.
>
> You have planned too much. Take a small kit. A backpack so you can hike
> would be nice...but have fun and if something presents itself take some
> time to get a great shot rather than shooting everything.
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Gene Palmiter
> (visit my photo gallery at http://palmiter.dotphoto.com)
> freebridge design group
> www.route611.com & Route 611 Magazine
> <pooua@aol.com> wrote in message
Hi.

Our camera club had an outing to the Edinburgh Fringe Cavalcade.

They then had a competition for the best picture taken.

I did not win it, but I got the most laughs by putting up a composite of the
other Members taking pictures. Not one of them even noticed what I had been
doing until the print went on display.

Roy G.
September 6, 2005 4:07:51 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Per "Mark?" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net>:
>I suggest the opposite of what everyone else seems to suggest:
>Everyone will tell you to go for the sunRISE.
>If you see the sun through the low clouds, I'm sure it's pretty, but the
>crater itself will appear fairly colorless/lifeless.
>But if you're there when the sun is just about to set...

I'll go along with that.

But I'd add that if anybody in the family has heart issues that the road to Hana
might be preferable to Hale Akela - where the parking lot is at about 12,000
feet.

I tried jogging across the Hale Akela parking lot once just to see what would
happen. I was in my twenties and in primo shape from surfing and racing
Honoruru traffic every day on my 10-speed. I thought my heart was going to
jump right out of my chest.
--
PeteCresswell
Anonymous
September 6, 2005 4:07:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 12:07:51 -0400, "(PeteCresswell)"
<x@y.z.invalid.USA> wrote:

>Per "Mark?" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net>:
>>I suggest the opposite of what everyone else seems to suggest:
>>Everyone will tell you to go for the sunRISE.
>>If you see the sun through the low clouds, I'm sure it's pretty, but the
>>crater itself will appear fairly colorless/lifeless.
>>But if you're there when the sun is just about to set...
>
>I'll go along with that.
>
>But I'd add that if anybody in the family has heart issues that the road to Hana
>might be preferable to Hale Akela - where the parking lot is at about 12,000
>feet.
>
>I tried jogging across the Hale Akela parking lot once just to see what would
>happen. I was in my twenties and in primo shape from surfing and racing
>Honoruru traffic every day on my 10-speed. I thought my heart was going to
>jump right out of my chest.

I was there shortly after I got out of the Army, and in much better
shape than I am now. :-(
We walked briskly across the parking lot, and I thought we were being
invaded by UFOs! Those purple spots in front of my eyes were
spectacular!

--
Bill Funk
Replace "g" with "a"
funktionality.blogspot.com
Anonymous
September 6, 2005 9:04:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

(PeteCresswell) wrote:

> But I'd add that if anybody in the family has heart issues that the
> road to Hana might be preferable to Hale Akela - where the parking
> lot is at about 12,000 feet.

Thanks for that insight. My Mom won't have too much trouble--she lives
in Albuquerque and regularly goes to the top of Sandia Crest (elevation
10k feet). Her forest services job gives her some exercise at that
altitude.

I fear that I shall be the laggard, as I am out of breath down here in
Dallas, 620 feet above sea level! But, my heart was given a bill of
perfect health by a cardiologist recently.
Anonymous
September 6, 2005 11:23:21 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 21:41:33 -0700, "Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even
number here)@cox..net> wrote:

>If you go to Haleakala...
>I suggest the opposite of what everyone else seems to suggest:
>Everyone will tell you to go for the sunRISE.
>If you see the sun through the low clouds, I'm sure it's pretty, but the
>crater itself will appear fairly colorless/lifeless.
>But if you're there when the sun is just about to set...

It's an amusing choice. Do you want to SEE it or PHOTOGRAPH it? :-)

Sunrise at Haleakala is visually breathtaking when the weather is
right. As the sun comes up and gradually illuminates the features in
the crater, it's appearance changes every minute. And the clouds at
the far end can be colorful. OTOH, as Mark wrote, photographically it
can be difficult. It will help a little that you are to be there in
January, when the sunrise illumination will be more from the right
hand side.

If you go up for sunrise, remember that from the summit sunrise will
be a little earlier than advertised. And it comes up fast with very
little twilight. It doesn't take long for the "sunrise effect" to
disappear.

I recommend walking down into the crater a little way. There is a well
marked trail. As soon as you start down all the perspectives change,
and you get a sense of being IN another world rather than just looking
at one in a picture. It is truly amazing. Remember to walk back up
very slowly. Pause frequently and take some more pictures while your
lungs and heart catch up.

Speaking of weather, it can be very cold (30F) up there (10,000 ft)
early in the morning. There will be ways for you to find out what the
weather is like at the summit before you go up. It can be just dense
fog (clouds), and fairly miserable. There are some hairpin turns on
the way up, but most of the road is completely open looking out over
fields on Haleakala's slopes and the hills at the other end of Maui.

With regard to the choice between Hana and Haleakala, while both are
beautiful, the latter is totally unique in the world. There are a
number of other places in Hawaii where you can see the kind of
vegetation and streams and ocean that are on the road to Hana.

It's not too far to the summit. I have done the drive to the summit
and the drive to Hana in the same day with lots of time to spare for
fun and games, and I wasn't at the summit for sunrise.

HTH
Duncan C.
Anonymous
September 6, 2005 11:23:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Duncan Chesley wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 21:41:33 -0700, "Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even
> number here)@cox..net> wrote:
>
>> If you go to Haleakala...
>> I suggest the opposite of what everyone else seems to suggest:
>> Everyone will tell you to go for the sunRISE.
>> If you see the sun through the low clouds, I'm sure it's pretty, but
>> the crater itself will appear fairly colorless/lifeless.
>> But if you're there when the sun is just about to set...
>
> It's an amusing choice. Do you want to SEE it or PHOTOGRAPH it? :-)

I don't believe that is the choice.
Photography is the art of seeing and of interpreting what you see through
the way you record it.
If anything, intentional photography teaches us to see more fully and with
greater awareness.

So yes...I want to see/experience it, but I also want to share it.
I'll always have the memory of the experience, but I also have an
interpretation of it via the photograph.

Right now I have a 40-inch long panorama of this on my wall, and no image in
my house draws more comment or wonder than this one of Haleakala near
sunset:
http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/36235344/original

EVERYONE seems to take images of the sunrise. That's fine if that's what
you want to capture.
I would like to capture that too, but I'm glad to have captured the color
and character of the crater itself.

> Sunrise at Haleakala is visually breathtaking when the weather is
> right. As the sun comes up and gradually illuminates the features in
> the crater, it's appearance changes every minute. And the clouds at
> the far end can be colorful. OTOH, as Mark wrote, photographically it
> can be difficult.

If you want to capture the color of the crater, it's more than difficult.
-You just can't get the fullness of it without light, and sunsetting light
is tough to beat.
Anonymous
September 7, 2005 7:04:36 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 19:05:57 -0700, "Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even
number here)@cox..net> wrote:

>I don't believe that is the choice.
>Photography is the art of seeing and of interpreting what you see through
>the way you record it.
>If anything, intentional photography teaches us to see more fully and with
>greater awareness.

Right you are, Mark, about this and about the colors at sunset.

I tried to point out the changing light and shadows as the sun rises,
which, for me, was the best thing about the sunrise. Hard to
photograph with a still camera or share in single photograph. But easy
to see. And not so visible at sunset as the shadows are mostly on the
far side of the features.

But, you really can't lose going up there, no matter what time of day
(or night if there's a moon), as long as you aren't in the clouds.

Duncan C.

PS Your panorama is wonderful! Congrats!
Anonymous
September 7, 2005 7:04:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Duncan Chesley wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 19:05:57 -0700, "Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even
> number here)@cox..net> wrote:
>
>> I don't believe that is the choice.
>> Photography is the art of seeing and of interpreting what you see
>> through the way you record it.
>> If anything, intentional photography teaches us to see more fully
>> and with greater awareness.
>
> Right you are, Mark, about this and about the colors at sunset.
>
> I tried to point out the changing light and shadows as the sun rises,
> which, for me, was the best thing about the sunrise. Hard to
> photograph with a still camera or share in single photograph. But easy
> to see. And not so visible at sunset as the shadows are mostly on the
> far side of the features.

I understand what you're saying.

>
> But, you really can't lose going up there, no matter what time of day
> (or night if there's a moon), as long as you aren't in the clouds.
>
> Duncan C.
>
> PS Your panorama is wonderful! Congrats!

Thanks.
I do agree that there are settings and environments where you just can't
adequately capture the experience with photos. If you get carried away, you
can miss the "wonder and awe" while you fiddle away with camera settings,
etc. This is, in my opinion, one of the greatest benefits of becoming
highly familiar with your camera--in that it sets you free from spending so
much thought about technical aspects. Once you've got the fiddly aspects of
photography down, you can skillfully capture your images, yet still not miss
the wonder of being there. This isn't to say that I never get too fixated
on getting the shot. Sometimes I do, but I'm finding that it happens less
and less.

Mark
Anonymous
September 11, 2005 9:30:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote:
> pooua@aol.com wrote:
>
>>
>> Normally, you would be correct. But, I'm not actually going to Hawaii
>> to take pictures. I am going to Hawaii because, when I was ages 5 to
>> 7, my family was stationed aboard Barber's Point Naval Air Station in
>> Waipahu, Hawaii. My Mom promised me several times that we would go to
>> the Big Island, some day. I was really looking forward to that. But,
>> it did not happen. Instead, we moved to Chattanooga, Tennessee.
>>
>> I am going to Hawaii to revisit my childhood home and VISIT THE BIG
>> ISLAND!!
>>
>> Everything else is extra, things I'm doing because I might as well do
>> them while I am there. After all, it's been 32 years since I was last
>> in Hawaii; there is no telling if I will ever be there, again.
>>
>> Barber's Point NAS was decomissioned several years ago. I hope to see
>> it before they bulldoze it into a Wal-Mart parking lot.
>
> Pooua,
> Interesting. About 25 to 30 years ago I was in Hawaii too. The
> Hawaiian Astronomical Society used to use Barbers Point NAS abandoned
> runways to hold star parties (where everyone brings their telescopes and
> views
> the night sky). I was inspired to write a book on astronomy from
> those days at Barbers Point (Visual Astronomy of the Deep Sky).
> I lived in Honolulu for 7 years (faculty at UH), 2 of my 3
> sons were done in Honolulu, and I still visit often. On a trip
> last fall, I drove past Barbers Point and was amazed at the
> development in the area, and apparently on the old NAS lands. So you
> might be disappointed at how it has changed. Soooooo crowded!
>>
>> And, yes, there isn't enough time. I know that. I probably would want
>> to spend a day just walking around where I used to live. Maybe a
>> week. I still remember playing there. I remember my friends. I
>> remember starting my first days in school there. I remember our
>> front yard was full of stickers, and our back yard was full of kaovi
>> thorns.
>>> I spent a week on Maui last summer, and that was far too short a
>>> time. I took some nice photos, but would have preferred at LEAST another
>>> week to look for more interesting stuf. I spent only a small
>>> portion focussing primarily on photos...doing lots of snorkeling,
>>> driving, etc.
>
> This is a good point considering the other discussion.

Roger,

Did you realize you were addressing my posts as well as Pooua's?
-Just wondered if you were confused...

-Mark
Anonymous
September 11, 2005 9:35:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote:

> When I did 35mm film, I only did velvia 50. Now get velvia 100F
> (not velvia 100). Note 100F is like velvia 50 at ISO 100. Velvia
> 100 (no F) is different and not like velvia 50.

OOPS! I mixed up velvia 100 and 100F. Velvia 100 (no F)
is like Velvia 50 but the faster speed. I think the way to
remember this is that the 50 had no F, so the new 100
has no F either. I hope I can remember this too!

Sorry for the confusion. The velvia 100F was introduced
a year ago but people who liked velvia didn't like the
new film. So Fuji recently came out with velvia in 100
speed using its newer film technology (original velvia
was came out in the early 1990s and used older technology
than films like provia 100F).

Roger
Anonymous
September 11, 2005 11:52:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Mark² wrote:


> Roger,
>
> Did you realize you were addressing my posts as well as Pooua's?
> -Just wondered if you were confused...
>
> -Mark

Probably---I just returned from England and am pretty jet-lagged.
Roger
Anonymous
September 12, 2005 2:04:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" <username@qwest.net> wrote:
> Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote:
>
>> When I did 35mm film, I only did velvia 50. Now get velvia 100F
>> (not velvia 100). Note 100F is like velvia 50 at ISO 100. Velvia
>> 100 (no F) is different and not like velvia 50.
>
> OOPS! I mixed up velvia 100 and 100F. Velvia 100 (no F)
> is like Velvia 50 but the faster speed. I think the way to
> remember this is that the 50 had no F, so the new 100
> has no F either. I hope I can remember this too!
>
> Sorry for the confusion. The velvia 100F was introduced
> a year ago but people who liked velvia didn't like the
> new film. So Fuji recently came out with velvia in 100
> speed using its newer film technology (original velvia
> was came out in the early 1990s and used older technology
> than films like provia 100F).

Actually, the two new Velvias came out pretty much at the same time, but
Fuji never got around to releasing the "100" version in the US.

I've had troubles scanning the high-contrast films: there tends to be
extremely bright noise (white speckles) at high contrast edges. When that
problem doesn't show up, Velvia 100F is pretty nice, but I'm currently in a
happy-with-Provia mood.

Fuji also comes out with an annual "limited edition" "spring flower" film.
In 2004 it was "Fortia" and this year it was "Fortia SP". ISO 50 and (like
Velvia 50) worse grain than Provia 100F, so although buying a few rolls, I
never got around to shooting it.

I'm finally getting around to scanning a roll of Reala I shot the other day,
and as before, I'm finding that (a) the red channel is off scale, and (b)
the phenomenal ability of color negative films to hold highlight detail is
simply a lie if there's bright direct sun involved.

Fuji has also released three new 120/4x5 only ISO 160 professional color
negative films with RMS 3 grain (i.e. the finest grain around). The PRO160NC
film is supposed to be higher contrast and good for landscape use (the other
two are for studio portrait work). I have a couple of rolls sitting on the
desk, but while today is one of the first decent days for photography (blue
sky, minimal smog (being Monday morning)) I have an job in the inbox and am
chained to the keyboard for the next three days...

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
Anonymous
September 12, 2005 2:04:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

David J. Littleboy wrote:

> Actually, the two new Velvias came out pretty much at the same time, but
> Fuji never got around to releasing the "100" version in the US.

Yeah, I knew that, but here in the US, we just started getting velvia 100
in July (at least in my area). I've got 2 new 50-sheet boxes of 4x5
just waiting for fall colors.

> Fuji has also released three new 120/4x5 only ISO 160 professional color
> negative films with RMS 3 grain (i.e. the finest grain around).

How about an ISO 25 film with grain and resolution better than Kodachrome 25?
Fuji, are you listening? That's what I really want (the grain and
resolution, not necessarily the slow speed).

Roger
Anonymous
September 21, 2005 6:17:08 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" <username@qwest.net> writes:

> How about an ISO 25 film with grain and resolution better than
> Kodachrome 25? Fuji, are you listening? That's what I really want
> (the grain and resolution, not necessarily the slow speed).

::looks in fridge...:: A neg film do? or must it be slide? No one
would make a film like that, it might put pressure on their `digital
quality'!

--
Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
+61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
West Australia 6076
comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot
Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.
!