RikSha, if you are traveling in Finland and want to inform someone that you are taking pictures with a camera, then I would advise you to use "ta foton" or "ta bilder". I've never heard anyone use "ta kort" in Finland, and I don't know if people would even understand it right away. Anrui and Arnauti, could it be a regional thing in Sweden, or just a matter of preference?
There's a problem with determinacy that makes us avoid foto in the combination with ta. We'd prefer to say ta foton or ta ett foto. If you're a serious photographer, you are less likely to use the word kort about your pictures, that will sound a bit … amateurish to you. :)
For taking photographs, in everyday speech we very often say just fota, short for fotografera. (in Sweden, don't know about Finland)
Yup, "fota" and "fotografera" are both used very often in Finland aswell. I would use "ta foton" in casual photografing, and "fota" or "fotografera" more often in situations where a professional photograper takes pictures. But that's a very, very small detail, and they are basically synonyms.
I think I meant this: if we say ta kort, then since kort is the same in singular and plural indefinite, even though kort in ta kort is probably plural, you can use it pretty much like the åka bil construction.
But that doesn't work so well with foto, in this case the general rule kicks in: you should have an article with nouns in the singular. Still, it isn't that simple either, I think people disagree about whether sentences like Vad har du för hobbies? Jag gillar att ta kort (?foto). Jag tog kort på mamma (?foto) are really correct or not. So I think there's a bit of competition among rules here.
åka bil, lyssna på radio, gå på restaurang are typical examples of constructions where Swedish uses an indefinite noun without an article, but English needs articles. The reason we don't need an article is that it doesn't matter what car/radio/restaurant I'm talking about in these constructions.