Ohio State at Night

A few weeks ago, I ventured to Ohio State’s campus on a Friday night to capture a few images of my alma mater’s campus and these are my favorite shots from that night.  Since it was in the dead of summer, relatively few people were on campus (unfortunately, a few people pitched a tent next to the Thompson statue, thus taking away an opportunity to get a shot of the famed former university president).

I will not say much in this post, as I want it to be a “viewing post” instead of a “learning post”; after all, I think at least the third blog should have a few pictures in it.

In case you are wondering, however, technically, I shot in manual (rarely do I not, anymore) and used the 50mm f/1.8 lens because of its sharpness (although, there is glare – some people like it, some do not; I am, however, ambivalent about the lens glare) and large aperture.  Also with using a prime lens, it facilitates the photographer to get more creative when framing a composition because of the inability to zoom.  Obviously, I used a tripod.  Shooting at night seems to be more like shooting film because of the longer exposures and the buffering after the shot (the buffer takes as long as the actual shot; i.e., if the exposure took 15 seconds, the bugger will also take 15, and thusly, the picture took 30 seconds). There is not too much more to say.  Enjoy.  (Clicking on the links will bring up a bigger and sharper image.)

The Lane Avenue Bridge taken from the Woody Hayes Dr. Bridge.

A light post sitting next to a pathway by the Thompson Library on the Oval at Ohio State.

Famous Mirror Lake; it is most known for people jumping into it the Thurday before the Ohio State/Michigan game every fall.

The shot from the top of Morrill Tower - which constitutes one of the largest dorms in the country - overlooking Ohio Statium.

A pathway next to the RPAC and Ohio Stadium. In case anyone cares, I used the high pass filter on Photoshop to sharpen this image and probably overdid it; oh well, I will blame that on not recently calibrating my monitors.

A scenic view of the Scottenstein Center where both basketball teams and men's hockey play, as well as where many concert take place.

A view of the Olentangry River, the two dorm towers, and the Drake.

A front side view of University Hall which would look tremendously better if I had a tilt-shift lens.

A glared look at the bridge on Woody Hayes Drive.

Review: Canon EOS 3

Shortly after publishing my first blog post yesterday, I completely, incidentally omitted an important subject: my first 135 camera, the Canon EOS 3 – yes, that camera, the one with eye control!  I focused so much on my history of digital cameras, I completely forgot about that camera and the fun that ensued.  So, I will dedicate my first real post to this wonderful camera (my intro did not really count; after all, I did not include any photographs on a blog site).  It will be a quasi-review, quasi-this-camera-is-awesome.

My last quarter at Ohio State set up nicely: I would take three academic classes and also earn three credit hours whilst shooting for The Lantern.  I took one political science class (the last class I needed for that major), a Photoshop class, and a black and white darkroom class.  Obviously, one needed access to a 135/35mm [Kodak named it 135, but it is actually 35mm diagonal, or 24mm x 36mm; full-frame digital cameras are that size (actually, the Nikons are 36 x 23.9) in case anyone who has heard of a “full-frame” digital camera and wants to know what that means].  I had heard of the EOS 3 and knew it sold for around $300 used (Canon ceased production years before spring 2009, when I took that film class), so I knew that it was in my price range.  I then hopped onto Ebay to see what it would set me back.  I found a wedding photographer (I do not remember if he was getting out of the business, wanted new cameras, or was moving to digital) who had that camera for sell for $180, including shipping and handling.  I was ecstatic.  A film camera for over one hundred dollars less than what I thought it would cost.  Thus concludes the story of why I had to purchase it.

A shot of the front of the camera, sans lens.

Note: I am not going to talk about film itself because that most definitely deserves its own post later.  Ostensibly, a review/discussion of a digital SLR would include information and commentary about its sensor – however, there are several different types of film mediums and many film speeds and would convolute this post.  So, I am not going to talk about film or show any pictures taken by the camera, because quite frankly, I have no pictures about which one may comment on the quality of the camera (but rather the film and the lens).

This is where the film goes.

I am not going to spend a lot of time talking about all the nerdy features of the camera that I do not know how to use or use to my picture-taking advantage (such as metering).  However, I will talking about things like its automatic focus!  Canon introduced its 45-point automatic focus system in this camera!  45-points!  However, being the “smoke ’em if you got ’em” person that I am, I have the “ring of fire” activated when I shoot (the ring of fire is a professional body colloquialism for activating all available automatic focus points).  Unfortunately, this take longer for the camera to achieve a focus lock because the computer in the camera has to think longer on which part of the frame to focus.  However, it is then very accurate and quick for just minor changes (such as someone walking).  Unlike 9-point AF systems which have one really nice AF point – the center – and a bunch of average ones – the outer points – using a body with a pro-AF has all of its points very sensitive.  The other really innovative feature of the AF is the eye control.  The owner of the camera has to calibrate the camera before being able to activate this feature.  I honestly have put little time and effort into it.  I once calibrated it, did not care for the results, and then went back to the ring of fire.  I have heard that eyeglasses and contact may affect the results of the calibration, but that would not include my fighter pilot eyes.  Considering that the EOS 3 was Canon’s last camera with the eye focus system, I think that it was more than me who said, “screw it”,  I am going old school.  (Note: to many photographers, AF does not qualify, however, to this whippersnapper, it does.)

The closed back of the EOS 3. There is a switch on the right side of the viewfinder which switched the eye control on or off, as well as for calibration. The back looked like any Canon SLR from that time, otherwise.

Machine gun mode.  My favorite part of shooting fast moving objects is to put the camera in high speed, continuous drive mode.  The Canon EOS 3 can shoot up to 4 frames per second by itself, and 7 FPS with the optional power boost (which I do not have, as I cannot justify it, unlike my 40D’s battery grip).  However, that means after 9 seconds, I would need to change rolls of film.  That is not as easy as changing memory cards, as one may imagine.  Although Canon calls it 4 FPS, it will probably be less, because the body has to “think” about where the subject will be for the next exposure while in the AF “servo” mode.  For instance, my 40D says it will shoot 6.5 FPS, but if I get 5, I am lucky.  Digital is nicer for shooting like a maniac, so I have tried to test the EOS 3’s servo to see how it competes (I would image very nicely).

In case anyone has the urge to know how the battery lasts, and what it is, this paragraph is up your alley.  The Canon EOS 3 uses 2CR5 batteries that are fairly difficult to locate and are not the cheapest kitty in the litter.  They cost about $15 each, but have a decent life.  I have only had to change the battery once.  Which tells you absolutely nothing in and of itself.  I would say I went through about 30 rolls of 36 exposures, as well as shooting “blanks” because I find the sound of the mirror to be cool and stereotypical of how a camera ought to sound (I also like to play with its AF system; I know you are searching Ebay and every other medium to find a cheap one).

This camera has a below average build, especially for its semi-pro class (I would call its digital equivalent the Nikon D700).  While it definitely does not have the cheaper plastic feel the Canon Rebels share, it does not feel like I can pound a nail with it, like I could with a Canon 1D Mark III or Nikon D700.  My other SLR, the Canon 40D, has a nice magnesium allow shell which I could pound a small nail through the wall to hang an 8 x 10.  Although I am not worried about the EOS 3 breaking, if one wants to take it someplace where punishment is bound to happen, then I may think about it (perhaps the Canon EOS-1v, which is basically the EOS 3, but much more expensive with a few nicer features).  However, although I do not put much stock into build, but many do, so I thought I would share it for the masses.

There exists no click to shutter delay.  The first time I fired up the shutter (which by the way, the noise you hear from an SLR is not actually the shutter, as the shutter only makes a faint sounds, but rather from the mirror) I honestly wondered if a shot was taken – I had to press the button again.  It did in fact shoot (I did not have film in the camera at the time, so it was more like shooting a film camera blank).  And the shutter release has the cool “soft” release that you do not actually press the shutter release button down all the way before it takes a picture, giving the camera a “soft feel” (unfortunately, my 40D does not have such a feature as the button is down all the way before taking).

The top of the EOS 3. Nothing special - it looks like every other pro level Canon from the time (notice no dial, either).

Okay, I gave some technical/anecdotal information about the camera.  However, do not forget perhaps the second most awesome “feature” (the first being the AF): EF lenses, specifically primes.  Any Canon EF lens (DO NOT put an EF-S lens on this camera unless you want to break the mirror) will work on the EOS 3.  That includes, but not limited to, the: EF 85mm 1.2L, 24mm 1.4L, 35mm 1.4L, 50 1.2L, 135mm 2L, and the 800mm 5.6L (Okay, that one was more in jest in that it costs five figures and few people have the resources and/or “need” to justify its price tag), plus many, many more.  I have none of the aforementioned lenses, but if someone wants to donate one to me to use, play with, and review, I would take it (or them) with open arms.

I think any “serious” photographer ought to purchase a 35mm film body.  You can find Canon Rebels for about 20 bucks (no, it they will not be as nice as the EOS 3, but will do the trick and do not forget the rule that the photographer is always more important than his or her gear).  What will shooting with a film camera do?  It will make the photographer think more about how he or she wants to compose the image.  Film and development can get expensive, so film photographers make every shot count.  Also, it makes the person think more about the shot’s exposure (assuming the person is shooting in manual mode) because there is no instant feedback; shooting manual with film requires more due diligence than with digital because I cannot just take a picture, review it, and increase the shutter speed by a stop for proper exposure.  With film, I would have to develop the film first.  However, development is another story for another day.  You all have been very patient with me this far.

Like I said, cheaper EOS (Canon’s newest line of SLRs that use the AF EF lenses) film SLRs by Canon can be had (I have no idea about Nikon, let alone the rest of the 135 film world) for less.  I like the advanced features of the Canon EOS 3, which the Rebels do not have.  For a few hundred more, Canon made the EOS-1v, which is basically the same as the EOS 3, but has a higher frame rate of up to 10 FPS, a metal body, and I believe a 100% viewfinder and a metal body (for the carpenters).  The EOS 3 and EOS-1v are close enough that potential buyers often intimately scrutinize their features; in other words, you are not missing much by purchasing the EOS 3.  I hope that this review shed light into how advanced Canon was in 1998 when they introduced this camera.

I thought about using my bookshelf as the place where I would shoot the EOS 3, but the background was too cluttered. However, I could not help myself and had to include a picture of my "light reading".

Der erste Posten

I have promised a website for my photographs for some time.  This is it.  Sort of.  Although one day I will launch a photo website with actual galleries and a real store, this blog will let the outside world know of my photography.  (My website currently rests in Dreamweaver purgatory.)

Ostensibly, I like to shoot things will my Canon [which is the real reason why people flock to the manufacturer of spotty automatic focusing (inside joke for another time)].  I cannot remember the exact age my parents entrusted me with a camera, but I must have been about seven or eight years old.  110.  Yes, the tiny film format (not to be confused with 120 film which is huge medium format film) found in cheap K-Mart cameras sitting inside of the cartridge.   Those 110 cameras were simple point and shoots with no options, other perhaps a flash and film forwarding.  However, they were cheaply built and I went through the no-name brands very quickly.  I went without a camera, the exception being disposable cameras, for a few years until I was an upperclassman in high school during which time I bought my first digital camera circa 2004.

I did some due diligence without having a clue for what I should look while researching what camera I would buy.  Although I image most people looking for their first point and shoot camera still look first at the total amount of megapixels a camera had, this was back when no one argued whether or not cameras had reached their effective limit of megapixels (I’ll cover why the amount of megapixels is perhaps the most overrated feature of a camera in the later blog).  I settled on a 5 MP Gateway camera.  The camera was pretty cool!  Instant feedback, unlimited pictures, and no fuss of film!  However, the camera’s battery life equaled the fuel efficiency of a Bugatti Veyron (I do not know how long contemporary P&S cameras’ batteries last, since I own none, but I imagine they ought to outlast my Gateway dinosaur which my dad now proudly owns and never uses) and had the horribly long click to capture which haunts so many P&S cameras.

I bought my second digital camera, a Panasonic DMC-FZ5, during my frosh year while attending The Ohio State University.  I loved that camera.  It is a superzoom “bridge” camera, in that it is an advanced P&S  which has many features of an SLR (hence, bridging into the “expert” camera level).  Although zoom multipliers are annoying to convert to focal lengths, having a 12x zoom (48x with the degrading digital zoom) was very nice to have when I was very far from a subject (I had not learned or practiced perspective, yet).  Currently, my mother retains ownership of that camera neatly hidden away in her duplex.  It was a slightly larger camera (it would not fit in a pocket), so I later got a cheapo Sony Cybershot P&S that came from Staples than included a free color printer (a standard 8.5″ printer which Canon made for photography; although cheap, it produces very nice images and I use it for photographs 8.5 x 11 and smaller).  That Sony was nice because it was small; currently the Cybershot has the job of my sister’s go-to camera when she decides to use a real camera instead of her cell phone because she killed her nice Olympus P&S.  This concludes the ancient history.

Because of a study abroad trip which fell through during my junior year (I paid homage to my schlecte Deutsch in this post title), I had a significant amount of money for which I had saved for months.   At first, I looked at Nikon, but discovered Canon because at the time Canon could do no wrong (not that Canon cannot do no right, now).  I purchased a Canon with a kit lens and the obligatory 50 f/1.8, along with a camera backpack.  I practiced and played with my camera during the summer (as well as purchasing an awesome ultra-wide angle lens) and decided I would like to be a photojournalist.  I was in college and Ohio State happened to have a student newspaper, so I would look them up when I returned.

Although I think I might have been the only person actually to apply to The Lantern (photo editor Kenny Greer even mentioned something about that during the spring), I spent the year shooting for them.  First, during the Autumn Quarter, as a free lance photographer, then as an independent studies photographer the  School of Communications earned a few credits.  I got to shoot over twenty sports and a number of big named acts, such as the Eagles, during my tenure as a Lantern photographer (I will have galleries of those events on my future website and may make posts about them later).  Although that activity never garnered my a single dollar, it felt like real “PJ” work and I loved every minute of it (OK, I did not really care to spend ten hours one day shooting a track tournament even though Ohio State athletes only constituted a relatively minor part of the festivities and the organizers never gave me a card so I could eat).

That wraps up the photography biography of me.  Obviously, I will blog about photo related topics and maybe throw in a few off-topic subjects, as well.  Football season is quickly approaching, after all.  I am scatter brained, generally write how I talk, and have a particular sense of humor (especially when written), so enjoy your time perusing my blog and be sure to make semi-hourly visits.

Thank you for reading this photo-less post.