Sunday, July 26, 2009

On the Miyajima ferry

I'm one of those people who owns a camera where people who own nice cameras say that people like me don't deserve a camera like that. Sure, it's a low-end Nikon digital SLR, but it does more than I know how to make it do and I haven't yet taken the time to figure all that out, so I probably am undeserving.

Nevertheless, I unleashed it on Hiroshima Prefecture recently, including the above shot of the sun setting over Honshu, taken from the ferry that plies the waters between the main island, a half hour south of Hiroshima, and the island of Miyajima, site of the famed Otori shinto gate (below). 


  1. Nice shots. IMO, definitely a good decision to go with the Nokia over Canon in this entry-level space. I kind of wish I'd gone with a D50 over my XTi when I got it. Then again, I got it for <$300 back then so I don't complain.

  2. Nokia? So you think these are cell phone shots, eh?

    Ultimately the reason I went with the Nikon — Nikon! — over the Canon is that I liked the image stabilizer for the Nikon better. I'm embarrassed to say, sometimes I shake my camera like a polaroid picture.

  3. geez JS was confused then hehe. Of course he was referring to Nikon :) Seriously, your shots are fine. Amazing actually. I love the colors.

    There's a lot of debate about the merits of having either the VR (Nikon) or the IS (Canon). I used to own a Nikon D70, and i can say its really good. I shifted to Canon, and its equally good if not better. Canon is soon to release (end of 2009) a new image stabilization technology, which is some sort of a hybrid.

  4. whoa. wow. This is what I get for posting something after having 6 hours of sleep and 20 hours of driving time in the past 48 hours. Yes, I meant Nikon.

    As for VR and IS, that is actually one area where I did fall on the side of Canon. But back then, and ever since, whenever I've played with the sub-$1000 SLR's, I've preferred the *Nikon* cameras. Caveat being that I'm not exactly a great photographer either, so in skilled hands, you could get great shots out of either.

  5. It really was a choice between two good cameras. The literature on the image stabilization for the Nikon seemed to speak more to my own bad habits than did the Canon, but not by much.

    I do like the color that I've gotten out of the camera, usually without tweaking it at all on the Mac. I think my head is crooked, though, because sometimes pictures I think are perfectly level end up crooked. I don't think it's the camera, because I have the same problem with my Olympus (the underwater camera I still take to the beach).

    The iPhone doesn't have that problem because I have more control over the final view as I take the picture. The iPhone's color is quite amazing for a cell phone camera, I think. I do enjoy the ability — when I'm connected wirelessly — to take a picture and blog it instantly. With all the free wireless hotspots in Seoul, I've been able to do that here and there as well.

  6. "I do like the color that I've gotten out of the camera, usually without tweaking it at all on the Mac."

    Im sure you will love the Film simulation mode of Fujifilm. I have the Fujifilm 200 EXR point and shoot, and it has a film simulation mode, you can choose Velvia and presto....very colorful and vivid landscapes straight from the camera.

  7. I love the color in the first couple of shots. I sometimes have regrets about going the Canon route.

  8. @ JR

    I saw you blog. You are truly amazing. Sometimes, i thought of shifting to Nikon too, but i only had my Canon for a few months and im still learning. But right now, ill stick with my Canon, probably for years. I haven't invested that much into expensive lenses yet, but when that time comes, the decision to change brands is harder.

    Any spokesperson for Samsung SLRs? hehe

  9. @ arvinsign

    Thanks. I found you on Flickr the other day and didn't make the connection. I knew your screen name sounded familiar.

    I read somewhere about the trends with Nikon and Canon. I wish I could find the link. Basically, it said at this point both companies are constantly trying to out do each other. When one of the companies edges ahead technology wise, the other company dumps more money into R&D. The point of the whole article was to just stick with one company and don't waste money constantly switching systems when something new comes out.


Share your thoughts, but please be kind and respectful. My mom reads this blog.