Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here

Get the new ON1 Photo 10 and Save $100 Today. Use Code: GetPhoto10 View Offer

Search galleries by camera

born2bongo 6 35 England
22 May 2009 7:37AM
Sorry if this has been raised before but does anyone else agree with me that it would be helpful to search for pictures taken by a particular camera?

I've just tried looking for a Sony A900 and returned no results, so then I tried 5D and still no results, but I've seen loads of them in my wanderings through the galleries.

As you can guess, I'm looking for a new camera. The imaging resource website is helpful but there's nothing to beat a selection of results with different users and different locations.

What do others think?

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Big Bri 14 15.9k United Kingdom
22 May 2009 7:54AM
Don't see much point really. What you'll see in the gallery is a modified, scaling down version of what the camera produces.
ade_mcfade 11 15.2k 216 England
22 May 2009 8:58AM

Quote: but there's nothing to beat a selection of results with different users and different locations.

that's a bit like putting lots of furniture in front of you and saying "this was made with Sankey tools, this one with Makita, this one with Joe Bloggs Hammers"

the Chippendale would be nice because of his craftmanship, not because of the chisel he uses, it's the same with photography
born2bongo 6 35 England
22 May 2009 9:29AM
So if it's all down to the skill of the photographer, why do people buy an expensive camera? And despite the limitations of size it's still possible to spot the difference. More often than not, when I am admiring a particularly good landscape, it turns out to be a 5D MkII. I'd just like to put some of them up against an A900, that's all.
ade_mcfade 11 15.2k 216 England
22 May 2009 9:37AM

Quote:So if it's all down to the skill of the photographer, why do people buy an expensive camera?

Because they can

Do you think every Ferrari driver is as good as Lewis Hamilton?

Basically, there are those who "need" pro spec cameras as they need the reliablilty, and ironically, those may well be poor photographters who just hound celebrities, and there are those who just want the best - often falling into the "all the gear and no idea" camp.

there are people on here with 6000 cameras who take appalling photographs. No names, but I'm sure you'll have people in mind Wink
Coleslaw 10 13.4k 28 Wales
22 May 2009 9:40AM
I would prefer to have a search system for lens used, rather than cameras.
Kako 9 151
22 May 2009 11:09AM

I agree with you on this totally. I have in the past trawled through galleries looking for images taken with a particular camera and or lens. It would be so much easier and save a lot of time if you could access these images by a search function. I'm sure someone will do it before long and probably pull in the crowds as a result.

I would never buy a camera or lens without wanting some idea as to its technical capability and the 'look and feel' of the images it/they produce (this can be discerned to a useful enough extent by being able to view dozens of images onscreen for comparison purposes). Knowing what lens was used together with the usual 'technical' shooting info normally supplied are enough in my opinion to provide
useful feedback which can then be added to all the other information in ones possession.
born2bongo 6 35 England
22 May 2009 12:44PM
Spot on Kako. That's it exactly. It just feeds in to a complete information gathering process. I've managed to find a review of the Canon 5D MKII, comparing it with the Nikon D700 and the Sony A900. That's been helpful, and certainly highlighted some important differences, but I still believe as wide a choice of pictures, in all kinds of situations, with all skill levels, is going to help me form a more solid opinion.

I would also like to see the same group comparison between low, medium and top end cameras. I tried this on imaging-resource.com but found variances beyond those that could have been attributed to camera difference alone. This is what led me to believe that I can only get a true representation by looking at as many pictures as possible.

My local camera shop only lets you try out a limited range of models (the ones that they will sell most, so they don't mind keeping a demonstration model). You can pick it up, switch it on, and look through the viewfinder/liveview, but you can't put a card in and take a picture. For me this is a big ticket item and I want to dot every i and cross every t.
rowarrior 7 4.4k 9 Scotland
22 May 2009 12:45PM

Quote:So if it's all down to the skill of the photographer, why do people buy an expensive camera?

Little boys, and their toys...
born2bongo 6 35 England
22 May 2009 12:53PM

Quote:Quote:So if it's all down to the skill of the photographer, why do people buy an expensive camera? Little boys, and their toys...

Ok, so in some peoples eyes, it's obviously a bad idea to want to compare 5D MKIIs with A900s and D700s. It seems to have generated more emotional response than practical observation.

What about the similarly priced and speced (and much lower priced) 500d and 50d, then?

For those who are similarly emotional about all things Canon, would it not be useful to compare a camera of any price against others models in the same class?
rowarrior 7 4.4k 9 Scotland
22 May 2009 1:08PM
Oh, I don't mind what you buy, but you asked why people do it, that was my answer: little boys want the biggest and brightest and shiniest toys they can get their hands on.

There are some people on here that have taken and sold photos on 'low spec' xxxD series Canons, and some people that have taken c**p photos on xD series Canons, I don't think it's necessarily going to help you the way you think. (btw, being a little girl I'm using a camera distinctly long in the tooth in the digital race, and I've never paid over 300 for a lens, so you'll probably want to skip my gallery in your research Wink )
strawman 11 22.0k 16 United Kingdom
22 May 2009 1:14PM
Sorry I think you are missing the point. At web sizes, it is hard to see the differences in image quality. And also editing can have a massive impact, so it is of little value.

and for the technical aspects, like for example the ability of a camera to fast AF track a subject for example could you tell the difference between a shot where the photographer pre-selected a point where he predicted the bird would fly and pre-focused and judged the moment spot on from one where a super fast AF system kept the bird in focus and took hundreds of photo's. Answer no.

Lets take your 500D and 50D comparison. For landscapes with the same lens, low ISO shots tripod mounted you will struggle to tell. The faster frame rate and longer shutter life??? The improved handling???

Go spend a day on wildlife or sports photography and you could split them. Handle them you could split them.

I think what we are trying to say is, the Gallery is there to show the abilities of the photographer, not the camera. We all hate the

Quote: That's a good photo you must have a great camera

And to me, much of the differences between cameras cannot be seen on a 1000 x 1000 pixel picture. So for those purposes for a lot of photography the base dSLR and kit lens often does a fantastic job. But if you want to shoot a rock concert in low light, or cover a flood lit football match, or capture birds in flight, or even have a camera that works 12 hours a day every day, the pro cameras and lenses work well.

so here are my tips for camera choice.

1 There are no lemons or lemon brands
2 For 90% of shots there is no significant quality difference brand to brand at a given market level.
3 A lot of what you pay for in a camera as you go up the range is reaction time/speed durability and handling
4 If you only print up to A3 in size 10 or 12mp are more than enough
5 If you want a large lens range and professional rapid support and turn around on equipment Canon and Nikon dominate
6 For most of us amateurs, the other brands often offer excellent value for money, but buy into a lens system, not a camera body.
7 Spend more on lenses than bodies.

And finally your 5D MKII V's A900 V's D700, pick the Nikon for low light and up to A3 prints and sharp responses. Pick the Sony if you do not need long focal lengths and want very large prints and shoot at lowish ISO, Pick the Canon for if you need to balance all of the above. Simple :-0
stolzy 10 3.8k 7
22 May 2009 1:25PM
I think a proper seach engine which works site-wide would be worthwhile.
ade_mcfade 11 15.2k 216 England
22 May 2009 1:25PM
to summarise...

there would be no harm in having a camera search facility


for the purpose you'd like the search, it's probably not that appropriate


for comparing lenses, a search facility could well be very useful - especially for new people who don't yet know the difference between a 10mm and a 100mm lens.
Carabosse Plus
12 39.9k 269 England
23 May 2009 12:31AM
If you make your camera judgements on the basis of some of the photos on here you might end up deciding an inexpensive compact performs better than than a top of the range DSLR! Lol! Wink

As others have indicated, to make decisions on camera-buying on the basis of smallish web photos (often heavily processed after shooting) is foolhardy indeed...........

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.