-+=OC Forums Camera Club=+- [Archive]

DerekDRP

06-27-07, 02:29 AM

-+=OC Forums Camera Club=+-

Comes the time to gather the Photographers of the OCForums. All instruments, all genres welcome. Tell us who you are and what you play. Rock, Classical, Jazz, Soul, whatever you play we want to hear about it.

Discussion can be about any aspect of piece of camera gear. flashes, equipment, photo sites, tips & tricks, favorite web links, etc... You name it, provided it is about Camera's and Camera Gear, this is a place where we can discuss it Ok?.

For organization, let's keep things fairly simple. Introduce yourself with you name and your camera you use.

After that, please provide a bio so that we can get to know who you are photographer newb, photographers intermediate, photographers pro. We want to know what camera's you own and currently, what style you use when shooting (or are learning), what equipment you have or plan to buy ect ect. If you want to post a pic, please keep it to no more than 600x400 and compress your jpgs as much as practical so that this thread does not become a 56k nightmare.

feel free to take pics from a manufacturer's web site BUT host the pics somewhere (ie please do not link directly from your source).

Member's List.

Thideras Canon Powershot A620

DerekDRP Canon Rebel XTI

Malpine Walis, member #666. Fuji finepix S602Zoom

Avatar, Canon Powershot S2-IS

Name: Rainless
Number: ONE
Level: Pro
Cameras: Sony VX2000, Canon A85 4.2 megapixel

CCUABIDExORxDIE
Sony HVRA1U HDV Camcorder
Panasonic AG DVX100B 24p MiniDV

JCLW Canon 10d.

thideras

06-27-07, 02:47 AM

Ok, I guess I'll start.

My name is Corey, I do have an interest in photography, I'm not really good, but I do enjoy it.

I have a Canon PowerShot A620, I really like it because it is a higher MP (I know higher isnt always better) and it has a ton of features and a Manual mode (the camera HAD to have that for me to buy it).

I wouldn't call myself a Newb to photography....I'd say intermediate :p

What style? I like taking pics of plants (close-ups) and landscapes including panoramas.

Good pics:

http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/57550919/
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/57550549/
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/57549796/
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/57549649/

Panoramas:

http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/57549420/
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/57549088/
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/32714476/ (not photoshopped, I swear)
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/20698134/
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/19814549/

Lots of pics, but I'm proud of everyone of them...

DerekDRP

06-27-07, 02:49 AM

So what number to you want?

thideras

06-27-07, 02:49 AM

So what number to you want?*shrugs* Doesn't really matter to me :bday:

DerekDRP

06-27-07, 02:54 AM

LOL. okies well I'll list you then put a question mark for future use ok?

DerekDRP

06-27-07, 02:57 AM

Ok I will do names and then the camera you own ok?

thideras

06-27-07, 02:59 AM

Ok I will do names and then the camera you own ok?Sure!

Malpine Walis

06-27-07, 08:49 AM

OK, Malpine Walis, member # 666. Fuji finepix S602Zoom. And Derek, you ripped me for your intro text.

FudgeNuggets

06-27-07, 09:18 AM

Heh, my name is my Avatar and I bought I nice camera thinking it would shoot better pictures but then realized I don't know a damned thing about shutter speeds, f-stops and all that crazy stuff. I've read a few photography sites and they all assume you have some prior knowledge to work with, maybe I'll take a night class or something if I don't learn anything here....

I've got a Canon S2-IS. Was supposed to be a good camera for $300 :shrug:

Malpine Walis

06-27-07, 10:25 AM

Well Fudge, if it is what I am seeing on Amazon, then it is fairly similar to my Fuji. If you leave it on auto most of the time, it will do a good enough job with regular pics like of you and your friends type stuff. Then when you explore the various other modes, it is a good platform for learning the basics on.

You probably will never do too much that is fancy on it but you should be able to get the techniques down after a good time. Later on, when you know the stuff, you may be wanting to upgrade to something more flexible (as I am right now). But overall, I would say that you have just about the right instrument for your level. and you did a lot better on the price than the $700 that I paid for mine about four years ago.

FudgeNuggets

06-27-07, 10:43 AM

I nearly got the 6MP version of that but it was $100 more than the Canon and used the more expensive CompactFlash cards, but it was able to take images in RAW format instead of just JPG.

DerekDRP

06-27-07, 01:59 PM

Hey mal can you private message me and help fix that? can I will defeinelty delete this and have my own please?

DerekDRP

06-28-07, 02:28 AM

I was thinking about going to Tim Allens House here in michigan. with my set up and do some poparatzi work :D

Oh yeah his summer home is close to were I live. it's like 40 miles away so thats pretty cool.

FudgeNuggets

06-28-07, 06:44 PM

Does anybody know of a hosting site that'll let me store and share images without having to change size and resolution? Photobucket makes me change both, not sure about Flickr......

Malpine Walis

06-28-07, 08:08 PM

Personal web space from your ISP?

But those pics are going to be so large that they will force most of us to scroll the screen around to see them. You really ought to resample them to not more than about 600px wide.

SolidxSnake

06-28-07, 08:21 PM

And Derek, you ripped me for your intro text.

HAHA that's the first thing I thought of

I would join but I'm not so much into photography. I wanna get an entry-level dSLR camera (ie. Canon Rebel XT Digital), but alas I have no money of which to speak.

DerekDRP

06-28-07, 11:47 PM

Does anybody know of a hosting site that'll let me store and share images without having to change size and resolution? Photobucket makes me change both, not sure about Flickr......Photo bucket don't just keep the same size image.

You could try fileput.com I think that's the website.

rainless

06-29-07, 12:32 AM

Is it Imageshack or photobucket that I hate? One of them has really annoying popups and possibly trojans.

Anywho...

I'm really more of the "loner/rebel"-type. So fancy me joining all these clubs all of a sudden. (First the Benchmarking team and now this. :D)

Name: Rainless
Number: ONE (preferably spelled out, but I'll take the number ;) )
Level: Pro
Cameras: Sony VX2000, Canon A85 4.2 megapixel

I'm more of a video artist, but I've become pretty handy with still photos. I'll switch computers in a sec and show you some of my favorite.

CCUABIDExORxDIE

06-29-07, 01:08 AM

vx2000 is probably one of my least favorite of the "pro-sumer" minidv cameras. gl2 is where its at!

and ive played with a nikon D1 in my day. its amazing what those cameras can do.

a few of my better pics

http://a127.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/5/l_1e2b440735eb901a2a4379599da31356.jpg

http://a355.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/01156/45/35/1156255354_l.jpg

http://a169.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/75/l_a7721ba83110c3707b8cc6a6bb0104e8.jpg

http://a381.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/8/l_dc2133145fff2a6f15699541d3baa81c.jpg

http://a299.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/19/l_8d3e0488a0403958373efd9de8122aaa.jpg

http://a1000.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/34/l_a246936e46151edff51949a36a947eff.jpg

rainless

06-29-07, 01:26 AM

vx2000 is probably one of my least favorite of the "pro-sumer" minidv cameras. gl2 is where its at!

and ive played with a nikon D1 in my day. its amazing what those cameras can do.

a few of my better pics

Great pics of that guy's butt! You must be close... ;)

Anyway... I love my VX2000. I was just playing around with a GL2 (possibly a GL1?!?) today and thought it was a cheap piece of junk. Maybe in leage with the sony 900/950 series... but certainly no match for a VX2000, which is basically the same as a PD150 only with a better mic and no DVCAM capabilities. It (and all Sony cams) lean a bit to the read, which suits me fine because so do I. :beer:

CCUABIDExORxDIE

06-29-07, 10:57 AM

i dunno what your smoking, but the gl2 just plain and simple smokes the vx2000. and anyways, the only video cameras i use to day are the Sony HVRA1U HDV Camcorder (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/384527-REG/Sony_HVRA1U_Sony_HVRA1U_HDV_Camcorder.html) and the Panasonic AG DVX100B 24p MiniDV (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/462231-REG/Panasonic_AGDVX100ABK1_AG_DVX100B_3CCD_24p_MiniDV. html)

Malpine Walis

06-30-07, 10:40 AM

Great pics of that guy's butt! You must be close... ;)

I was thinking the same thing.

That being said, apart from criticizing each other's cameras, what say we try to help each other out here. For example, I am thinking about upgrading my existing camera. Not that it is by any means a bad unit but since I got it, I have learned more about photography and I have kind of grown to the point where I could put the features of a better unit to good use. So why not give me some recommendations of units to look at.

What I am looking for is a good DSLR from a mainstream manufacturer, such as Cannon, Olympus, Fuju, Nikon or similar. One of the features that I really need is the ability to swap lenses around and a good product line to pick from. Especially, I will be looking for something with a telescope adapter to fit a 2 inch focuser (but the major brands probably all have that).

Since I will be doing some astro-photography, I would also like to get a camera that can support remote control software that can be run from a laptop (open source preferred).

Nice but not essential would be the ability to continue using my existing stock or NiMH AA batteries.

At this point, I am not going to specify a price range. Sure I would rather not spend $3,000 just on a body but then a couple of years and a set of 3 or four lenses from now, my whole kit might end up costing that much. Basically, just let me know what you would suggest at any price and I can run with stuff from there.

JCLW

06-30-07, 12:08 PM

Canon 10D (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_eos10d.asp)
- 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
- 50mm f/1.4
- 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
- Speedlite 430EX flash
- RS-80N3 Remote shutter switch

Canon SD630 (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_sd630.asp)
- WP-DC3 Waterproof Case

I bought the 10D when it came out, and have been very happy with it. The Rebel was not out yet, or else I would have considered it to save some $$$. The 10/20/30D cameras are also a little bigger (and more rugged) then the Rebels and fit more comfortably in my hand(s). If I were to buy another camera today I'd take the 30D over the Rebel XTi (400D), just for the larger size.

The 24-85 (= 38-136 on the 10D) has served me well as a general walk-around lens. There have been times when I wish I had a little more wide angle or a larger aperture, but altogether it's a nice small, light, fast-focusing lens. If I were buying a new lens I'd pick the 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM instead, but it will only mount on the newer cameras that accept EF-S lenses.

The 50mm f/1.4 (= 80mm on the 10D) is an amazing lens for the price. An equally amazing lens for the price is the 50mm f/1.8. IMHO if you have a Canon body you should have one of these two (unless you have a 50mm f/1.2L or a 50mm f/0.95.

The 75-300 IS USM (= 112-480mm on the 10D) is a funny thing. Sometimes I love it - sometimes I hate it. I've taken some good picks with it but all in all I yearn for something better. The focusing is really slow, so wildlife (or airshow) pics are really hard. It's been more or less replaced with the 70-300 IS USM, but I'm thing of throwing down a little more $$$ and picking up a 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L.

The 430EX is a great flash. No complaints. The red LED AF assist is so much better then just using the camera - esp if your camera just pulses the main flash to help AF.

I picked up the remote shutter to take some moon/planet shots. Nothing much to be said about it. It works. The cable could be a little longer.

Picked up the SD630 refurbished for my other half just so we would have something to throw in a pocket without having to lug the dSLR around. The WP case is lots of fun. Works really well.

FudgeNuggets

06-30-07, 08:07 PM

Canon stuff is easiest to find, but I know two or three people who SWEAR by the Nikon products, mainly the D80.

DerekDRP

06-30-07, 11:45 PM

Fudge I agree with you they are the best, But the D 200 is actually looking pretty sweet however I love canon. and I will be getting my very first real lens. It's an I.S lens on an E.F mount. And it's about $1,599. I will be getting it around november.

Tc3 Toad

08-02-07, 04:24 AM

lets get this thread back up.

I got a Canon A710is for christmas and took a digital imaging class in college. 5 months and 2000 pics later I wanted to do more so I saved up and bought a Canon 400D DSLR. Just moved some files over to a portable HDD and checked the properties and had nearly 7000 pictures on it. Recently I have picked up a 4x3 tablet to do some better editing in photoshop.

I have some of my pictures on my website.
www.jameshickok.com

bobthemoo

08-02-07, 04:44 AM

I'm Edd, I have a Nikon D50. I mainly take pictures of scenery. This one for example, was one beautiful but lucky-ass shot. Managed to snap it on the way home from the beach one day (It's not photoshopped apart from the tag).

http://s12.photobucket.com/albums/a230/Bobthemoo/?action=view&current=sunsetpiertgd.jpg

JCLW

08-02-07, 07:17 AM

Very nice. The old pier at Brighton?

bobthemoo

08-02-07, 03:10 PM

Very nice. The old pier at Brighton?

Yeah the west pier. You been there?

SavageBasher

08-03-07, 02:07 AM

Canon XT
18-55 EF-S
50 1.8
70-200 f/4L

I just like to take pictures. I lack in the artistic elements, but I'm good with anything technical lol

IAmMoen

08-03-07, 02:17 AM

Hello I am Chris, hopefully member number "number two"
I have a canon 20d with horrible lenses (canon kit lens and quantaray 55-200mm f/4-5.6). Hopefully ebay shines its goodness upon me and I win the 70-200 f2.8L I am bidding on.
I like to take pictures and am really just getting into the whole thing. Until I get good the pictures have a lot to do with the subject rather than the execution and sometimes big events happen right in your neighborhood.
for some of the pictures...
http://picasaweb.google.com/iammoen

Speciale

08-03-07, 02:46 AM

I've been taking photos for...years.

I work for a weekly newspaper at home and until last semester worked for a 20,000 daily paper at school. This year i'll be taking photos for the University of Iowa Athletic department.

Gear...really not important but i'll play.

1D
28mm f/1.8
50mm f/1.4
85mm f/1.8
70-200 f/2.8
(sigma) 120-300 f/2.8
1.4x & 2x tcon
remote, filters, gels, off shoe cord...memory cards, monopod, yay...
I carry it all in my sexy arse Domke camera bag (well, almost all of it)

Here is a months work from last year
(http://www.pbase.com/timmyquest/september)

IAmMoen

08-03-07, 09:18 AM

IAmMoen

08-03-07, 01:27 PM

Add a canon 70-200 f2.8L to the list of my lenses! Woohoo!!!!

Speciale

08-03-07, 05:37 PM

Add a canon 70-200 f2.8L to the list of my lenses! Woohoo!!!!

haha, see...you're on your way. You'll own my gear and more in no time :beer:

I must be running...gotta go photograph a water-ski show :santa2:

IAmMoen

08-03-07, 09:23 PM

haha, see...you're on your way. You'll own my gear and more in no time :beer:

I must be running...gotta go photograph a water-ski show :santa2:

Even if I did have all your equipment I dont have the gigs. Dagnabit.

By the way is anyone else checking this thread anymore? Hello?

SolidxSnake

08-03-07, 10:02 PM

I'm here.. just crying because I don't have a camera better than a consumer Digicam :(

IAmMoen

08-03-07, 10:35 PM

I'm here.. just crying because I don't have a camera better than a consumer Digicam :(

Thats where I started too. Just try to set that bugger on manual and do what you can :)

Speciale

08-06-07, 01:05 PM

Some crappy shots from a water ski event i had to cover...they wouldn't let me on the boat! and i think my 70-200 is having AF issues :(

http://www.pbase.com/timmyquest/image/83458734.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/timmyquest/image/83458743.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/timmyquest/image/83458746.jpg

SolidxSnake

08-06-07, 05:06 PM

Thats where I started too. Just try to set that bugger on manual and do what you can :)

That's what I do. I don't really practice photography much. I normally do crappy macro shots of random things under a light with a piece of plain printer paper as backing (for a bright white background). I'm using a pretty good light to give me a nice, clean white (5500°K CFL bulb).

I don't have much else to photograph... I can't really think up artistic sorts of things, not the way my mind works, unfortunately.

I wanna try messing with DOF stuff though. Wanna learn how all of that works. As far as I know, low f-stops = greater DOF, vise-versa. The rest is just focusing on the subject, correct?

I gotta see if I can borrow my neighbor's oldschool Canon SLR camera. I forget the exact model, but it was a first of it's kind IIRC.

Just googled what I remember, It's a Canon AE1.

Speciale

08-06-07, 05:16 PM

I don't have much else to photograph... I can't really think up artistic sorts of things, not the way my mind works, unfortunately.

Photography is actually pretty simple, but it doesn't just come to anyone. Granted, it comes to some faster then others, but anyone can get a respectible level of photography. All it takes is practice. You don't have to be "artistic", just go out and photograph the world as you see it...that is where the art is.

After you do it long enough you'll start to notice things that work and things that don't. Just go out and take pictures for yourself, it doesn't matter what anyone else thinks really. As soon as you do this, and after some practice, you'll start to see the magic through the lens.

Every year i strive for that moment, that "hit me" moment where something hits me and i just get it. What is "it"...it's kind of up to you.

As for "messing with that depth of field stuff"...

A wider aperture yeilds less depth of field, which is what i suspect you are getting at. But like anything you gotta use it properly to work right. Superchargers are great, but you can't just throw it on top of a car and expect it to be fast, it's a little more complicated then that.

Now, back to reality...your point and shoot isn't going to yield much control over the depth of field. With your sensor as small as it is, there really isn't much in terms of depth of field to play with.

1cem4n

08-06-07, 10:48 PM

1cem4n here, i have a Sony Cybershot U. crappy little thing but hopefully getting a Nikon D40 from a couple buds. for now, i'll just post up my deviant art profile. you can tell me if my pictures are good or not. lately, i've been messing with photoshop a lot for fun.

http://3vilcrayon.deviantart.com/gallery/

JCLW

08-07-07, 01:12 AM

Yeah the west pier. You been there?
Sorry, I stopped getting the reply notices for this thread for some reason.

I don't have any good pics of the pier(s) but here's another from Brighton:
http://img482.imageshack.us/img482/9410/img8385qq7.jpg

IAmMoen

08-07-07, 04:29 PM

add another lens to the list. canon ef 50mm f/1.8 II. The wallet is beginning to weep though so I will stop the ebay'ing for a bit :)

SolidxSnake

08-08-07, 05:59 PM

Well, I just borrowed my neighbor's AE-1 (this time around I know what I'm doing) and I took a few shots today. I got some shots of a pretty nasty lookin' bug... not sure what it was. When I finish up this roll of film and get it developed I'll scan up the pics and post the ones I think are decent here.

SolidxSnake

08-09-07, 09:57 PM

Double post... but, I think it is justified.

Got my first roll of film developed... better than I expected, seeing as how I wasn't completely familiar with the camera. I didn't use the auto-exposure adjustment that the AE-1 was well-known for on all of it's lenses, I set the aperture, exposure, everything myself for a change. It was kinda annoying not being able to see what the pic was gonna turn out like until after I got the roll of film developed. It was some cheap CVS ISO200 film and was developed at CVS too. Good enough to learn on I suppose.

I only think 2 of the pics are worth posting. There's only around 6 or so that I really like, some others coulda been so much better if I had been more careful with the focus. I photoshopped these pics, but I'll post up both. The scanner kinda made the images look a bit faded, so I increased saturation on the pics, as well as contrast. They're extremely boring to many... just a few cliché flower shots. They're just so easy to take pictures of :D

http://bostonrinkrats.com/solidxsnake/AE1/whiteflower.jpg
http://bostonrinkrats.com/solidxsnake/AE1/whiteflowermod.jpg

http://bostonrinkrats.com/solidxsnake/AE1/redflowers.jpg
http://bostonrinkrats.com/solidxsnake/AE1/redflowersmod.jpg

Speciale

08-10-07, 02:32 AM

Good stuff, the second one is nice. The first is a tad out of focus. Start on flowers, move to people :)

And now my turn for the day :)

Ahhh, i love this time of year. Each and every time i go photograph it i get nostalgic and want to strap up the pads and do it all over again (only this time with a little more drive). At any rate, this past Wed. marked the official start of the '07 football season here in illinois and i had to go out and grab some photos for the paper from our two local schools.

Nothing too exciting, but it's likely the last photos i'll be taking for a few weeks...

1. Line coach, and former WHS student, Mike Brasile motivates his
lineman during position specific conditioning drills Wednesday August
8th during the schools first official practice of the season.
http://www.pbase.com/timmyquest/image/83648648.jpg

2. Woodstock head coach Steve Beard discusses blocking assignments
with running back Kyle Sahs Wednesday August 8th during the schools
first official practice of the season. The Streaks are looking to
improve on their 1-8 season of last year with returning Jr.
quarterback Derek Brown and one of the largest teams to provide
support in recent history.
http://i.pbase.com/o6/08/432908/1/83648651.HSuO4SgR.2.jpg

3. Running back Sal Carbajal looks upfield during 7 on 7 touch drills
during the seasons first practice on Wednesday August 8th.
http://www.pbase.com/timmyquest/image/83648654.jpg

4. Marian's Assistant coach Dirk Stanger discusses the basics of the
teams running packages during the seasons first practice Wednesday
August 8th. The hurricane's are looking to repeat last years success
where they finished 2nd in the Class 5A State championship.
http://www.pbase.com/timmyquest/image/83648657.jpg

5. Returning Jr. Quarterback John Budmayr hands the ball off to TJ
Papus during running back drills at the seasons opening practice
Wednesday August 8th.
http://www.pbase.com/timmyquest/image/83648658.jpg

IAmMoen

08-10-07, 01:11 PM

what lens were you using for those pix speciale?

phantasm

08-10-07, 01:47 PM

I'll bite. My name is Derek and i'm more an advanced Intermediate Photographer. I've taken a couple of classes at the college level and have used alot of different gear. Right now i'm going old school and trying out my older Mamiya 645 medium format system.

I'm a Nikon nut, always will be. I'm a member over a Nikonians and shoot whenever i can.

My previous system was an N80 with alot of different lenses. I primarily shoot wildlife and nature, i find it to be more interesting. Currently im trying to save up for my D200. As for a number... ummm 29?

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t179/phantsam/Parrott.jpg

This was taken with my N80 and a 300mm lens at F4. Sky was slightly overcast and i was using Fuji Slidefilm at ISO 100.

DerekDRP

08-10-07, 01:49 PM

You guys rock. I hope I will get that good.

and I will add your names later tonight after I get back from town.

Hey btw my new camera lens ( with an adapter )

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y98/Docpeplvr/Telescope/sideviewunpacked.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y98/Docpeplvr/Telescope/Packaged.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y98/Docpeplvr/Telescope/asscessories.jpg

Speciale

08-10-07, 03:38 PM

what lens were you using for those pix speciale?

70-200 f/2.8

Camacho111

08-11-07, 01:55 AM

hey I wanna join. Any room for newbies?

So far this is what I have for now.

Nikon D40
Nikkor 15-55mm f3.5-5.6 EDII
Nikkor 55-200mm f4-5.6 ED
manfrotto tripod 718b

saving for a sb-600 flash and a 50mm f1.4 glass. maybe next week with all this overtime.

FudgeNuggets

08-23-07, 05:04 PM

Ok, what's a good free place where I can upload and link to my beautiful full sized 2592x1944 pictures? They're in the 3MB file size range. I just lose too much quality downsizing for places like photobucket.

Speciale

08-23-07, 05:07 PM

FudgeNuggets

08-23-07, 05:11 PM

Why would you post full sized images?

to get the details.... looks WAAAAAAAAY different at forum size than at full size. Like the star pics I took. photobucket sized, can only see the brightest two or 3 stars and no grain. At full size, you can see dozens of stars and it is terribly grainy like Derek's were.

JamesXP

08-23-07, 05:25 PM

I think you should get a freewebs site and use that to link your images?

Albaholic

08-23-07, 09:19 PM

How did i not see this thread before.

My Gear

Nikon D200 (eying out the D300 and drooling over the D3)
18-70mm Kit Lens
18-200mm VRII
35mm f2
50mm f1.8
Sigma 10-12mm Wide Angle
SB800 flash
I really want a nice macro lens though

I'll try to find somethings I can post when I get home from work

1cem4n

08-24-07, 03:22 AM

So, I finally got my Nikon D40. I'm still using the regular lense but I have a hoya polarized filter over it. I might or might not get a external flash as i have my eyes on a remote shutter release right now.

I took a lot of pictures on my trip to hong kong.

http://fc04.deviantart.com/fs21/f/2007/234/5/0/Hong_Kong_Alley_by_3vilCrayon.jpg

http://fc02.deviantart.com/fs21/i/2007/235/8/b/Jade_Market_by_3vilCrayon.jpg

http://fc01.deviantart.com/fs21/f/2007/233/5/4/Old_Hong_Kong_by_3vilCrayon.jpg

http://fc01.deviantart.com/fs20/i/2007/228/9/c/Life_is_not_a_Spectator_Sport_by_3vilCrayon.jpg

tell me what you guys think.

btw, albaholic, hows the 50mm f1.8? i sort of want it but the 18-200mm is what i really want right now. too bad that lense is worth more than my camera. and is there any reason i should get an SB800 over an SB600?

SolidxSnake

08-24-07, 03:49 AM

1ce: DUDE that first pic looks straight out of a movie set for a dark alleyway, etc.

1cem4n

08-24-07, 05:09 AM

thanks, it's been a long time since i've been on OCforums. how's it going sxs?

Albaholic

08-24-07, 05:32 AM

tell me what you guys think.

btw, albaholic, hows the 50mm f1.8? i sort of want it but the 18-200mm is what i really want right now. too bad that lense is worth more than my camera. and is there any reason i should get an SB800 over an SB600?

I love the alley pic... Looks bad ass. 50mm 1.8 is great it is definitely a must have. Especially at ~$100 how can anyone not own it. The 18-200 is great when you dont want to carry too many lenses. But I find myself in love with prime lenses. It took me quite some time to spring for one. To be honest though the one i use the most is the 35mm f2 it really helps with the crop factor. I almost never use my 18-70mm now. As far as the flash goes. The SB800 is so robust i havent figured out how to use it to its full potential. It's probably a waste in my hands. The only time I can see the 800 being more beneficial over the 600 is if you plan on using multiple flashes i.e. slaving sb600's to the sb800 (which I've never had to do) If I could do it all over again I would have saved some money and gone with the 600. I've already put up my d200 for sale in anticipation of the d300 :)

1cem4n

08-24-07, 06:28 AM

Camacho111

08-24-07, 07:52 AM

How sharp is the 50 f1.8? I see tons of pics with that lens and WOW for a 100bucks you can't go wrong. Only half price of the 50 f1.4.

Speciale

08-24-07, 10:51 AM

How sharp is the 50 f1.8? I see tons of pics with that lens and WOW for a 100bucks you can't go wrong. Only half price of the 50 f1.4.

Sharp indeed, love mine.

That said, the AF is kinda gross and its plastic. For $75...you're right, you can't go wrong, but i'll be getting the 1.4 soon enough :soda:

**EDIT**

You're speaking of the Nikon yes? I suspect it's comparable.

Albaholic

08-24-07, 01:01 PM

yeah, the d300 looks kickass and i can't wait for some user-photos from it. how much did you sell your d200 for? i just got my nikon d40 brand new for around 400 with tripod and 2gb memory card as well as a decent case.

I didnt sell it yet. I have it at ~$1000 but i included some extras with it to make sure it sells. I thought about posting it here but I didnt think it would sell.

How sharp is the 50 f1.8? I see tons of pics with that lens and WOW for a 100bucks you can't go wrong. Only half price of the 50 f1.4.

I like it. Its not razor sharp but its a very fun lens for the price.

Sharp indeed, love mine.

That said, the AF is kinda gross and its plastic. For $75...you're right, you can't go wrong, but i'll be getting the 1.4 soon enough :soda:

**EDIT**

You're speaking of the Nikon yes? I suspect it's comparable.

AF is loud and the lens is plastic but at the time i could not afford the 1.4 but Id like to get either a macro lens or the 85mm (the price breaks my heart though)

I love that multi quote button

Camacho111

08-24-07, 01:12 PM

Albaholic

08-24-07, 01:43 PM

LOL, I don't know how to use the multi quote feature.

The 50mm 1.8 will not AF on my body but MF is not a problem for me.

Albaholic, a nice prime macro and potrait is the 105mm f2.8 AF-s macro.

Special, yeah the nikon version. I wish some canon lense can fit on nikon bodys. Certainly more prime on your side of the river.

just hit the Multiquote button on everything you want to quote, when your done hit the quote button.

I was looking at the D40 as a backup for me but I use AF as a crutch. My eyes aren't so great so MF is tough for me. How is the D40 viewfinder brightness?

Yeah I was looking into those 105mm VR macro lenses or the tamron 90mm. Dont they make an adapter for nikon---> canon? I wonder if that would meter properly though. I do love prime lenses.

FudgeNuggets

08-31-07, 02:38 PM

Is Minolta still in a joint venture with Nikon? Are their lenses still Interchangable?

Albaholic

08-31-07, 03:02 PM

I think there is a mount adapter you can buy but it messes up metering. I heard a long time ago that you were supposed to be able to use Minolta lenses but i don't think that's the case now

MRD

08-31-07, 04:26 PM

Minolta lenses were never interchangeable with Nikon. Minolta used an MD mount for manual focus and a Minolta proprietary AF mount for their AF lenses. Nikon has never used anything but the F mount since the original Nikon F camera in 1959.

Personally, I like prime lenses for sharpness, but zooms are nice for convenience sometimes.

My system:
Nikon N8008S body
Nikon MF-21 Multi Control Back
Nikkor AF-D 24mm f/2.8
Nikkor AF-D 50mm f/1.4
Nikkor AF-D 60mm f/2.8 Micro (1:1)
Nikkor AF-D 105mm f/2.8 Micro (1:1)
Bogen (Manfrotto) tripod, forget the number

I need to get some good teles at the moment. I am thinking of a zoom, but if I get one, it will be a fixed 2.8 with VR. Also strongly considering moving to digital at this point. The 8008S does anything you could want for a film camera, especially with the MF-21. (spot meter, center weighted, matrix metering, depth of field preview, 1/8000s shutter speed, data back, intervalometer, freeze focus, focus tracking, multi-exposure, etc.)

I don't want to replace it with a cheapo D-SLR that lacks what are for me key features (spot meter, depth of field preview, etc.)

I also sort of have an N90S when I want it. It's my sister's, but she hardly uses it, so it's mine whenever I want a second body.

Albaholic

08-31-07, 05:11 PM

You've got a lot of nice glass. I LOVE primes. but that fixed appeture zoom is going to cost you quite a bit im guessing. I can barely stand variable appeture when switching to my zooms How is that 105 micro? I was looking at getting the 60mm as well. Consider me jealous. :beer: I have a cheap half broken best buy tripod. I need to get a better one.

MRD

08-31-07, 05:21 PM

Both of the macros (nikon calls them micro for some reason) are incredibly sharp, even at longer focal lengths. I found it very impressive that I could go to 1:1 w/o any extension at all. The 105mm works very well as a general purpose short tele, which is a very useful lens for nature photography and portraiture (and just about anything else). You could use the 60mm as a normal if you can live with a 2.8 max aperture. I have the 50 1.4 for speed.

The main reason I'm waiting on the tele purchase is that the AF-S lenses don't work on the 8008s (they work on the n90s though). If I'm going to drop that kind of cash I want a fixed aperture lens with VR and AF-S. I've also considered picking up the 180 and a 300 fixed, and maybe throwing in a few teleconverters. The 180 EDIF is a nice lens. The 200mm micro is beautiful quality but it's too big and heavy imo for a 200.

I'd get a good tripod. They only cost ~150 for a bogen or gitzo low end, and those are very sturdy. Even with the best glass, an unsteady tripod will do you in when you really want sharpness.

I don't know what kind of photography you do, but if you do nature photography, I'd highly recommend buying all the books by John Shaw. There's nothing else out there that teaches you so well. It covers everything from the very technical, to gear selection, to exposure and composition. I'd also recommend getting his original book which is now out of print (the one with the white bird on the blue water background on the cover). He was the one that first turned me on to prime lenses, although he's started using zooms more recently. I love his stuff though.

http://www.johnshawphoto.com/

Here's one of the galleries (there are more off the main page too). I think his work is the best I've ever seen for nature photography.

http://www.johnshawphoto.com/favorites_gallery/index_fav.html

The books: http://www.johnshawphoto.com/books.html

I was looking at the D40 as a backup for me but I use AF as a crutch. My eyes aren't so great so MF is tough for me. How is the D40 viewfinder brightness?

I'd be careful with the D40 if you have existing equipment. I think it's incompatible with a lot of the older lenses (even the AF-D series).

SolidxSnake

08-31-07, 10:02 PM

I don't know what kind of photography you do, but if you do nature photography, I'd highly recommend buying all the books by John Shaw. There's nothing else out there that teaches you so well. It covers everything from the very technical, to gear selection, to exposure and composition. I'd also recommend getting his original book which is now out of print (the one with the white bird on the blue water background on the cover). He was the one that first turned me on to prime lenses, although he's started using zooms more recently. I love his stuff though.

http://www.johnshawphoto.com/

Here's one of the galleries (there are more off the main page too). I think his work is the best I've ever seen for nature photography.

http://www.johnshawphoto.com/favorites_gallery/index_fav.html

The books: http://www.johnshawphoto.com/books.html

Those are some incredible pics! I like that guy's work :)

Here's some more recent shots of mine.

http://bostonrinkrats.com/solidxsnake/AE1/corknecklace%20copy.jpg
That one's kinda abstract... went into Photoshop and unsaturated the picture completely, besides the cork itself for emphasis.

http://bostonrinkrats.com/solidxsnake/AE1/dog%20copy.jpg
Same as above, different subject. Photoshop work was a little shoddy... I was lazy.

http://bostonrinkrats.com/solidxsnake/AE1/matt%20copy.jpg
One of my friends off the top of some building we chill at.

http://bostonrinkrats.com/solidxsnake/AE1/SW.jpg
Finally, a large view of the south/west side of my city (Waltham, MA) from that same building. This one was the clearest of the pictures I took from up here. The building itself has a standard shingled roof, and I was a bit shaky (somewhat shaky with heights), so most of my shots up here were blurry. If I were to rotate the camera about 30-45° to the left, I'd have gotten a good view of Boston :).

I took quite a few pics of bees and other such bugs in my mom's garden... However not a single one of them came out at all. They were all very blurry, and for no reason that I could think of. I made sure they were in perfect focus when I took the pics. I was using a 70-210mm Zoom lens (seen here (http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/fdlenses/fdzooms/70210.htm#70-210mm)). The lens itself is extremely old and it's extremely frustrating to focus (the focus/zoom ring is really hard to rotate, it gets stuck if I stop rotating it). I can understand a few of them going out of focus due to things such as movement, reasonably slow shutter speed, but every single one of them seems somewhat strange. I was shooting at f/4.0, and shutter speed wasn't so low (I believe somewhere between 1/60-1/250). Plus, only one of the pics had a motion blur (that would be caused by movement captured with a slow shutter speed). The rest looked plain out of focus... I was almost positive they were focused correctly via the viewfinder.

For the record, I was using the macro focusing portion of the lens at 70mm. I'm hoping that some of those pics should have come out fine if I was using a different lens, but who knows.

I can upload the pics in question if someone wants to assist me :)

DerekDRP

08-31-07, 10:26 PM

Camacho111

08-31-07, 10:34 PM

Thats great derek. I was messing with some pano's with no luck. I got plan a pano before I take the shot.

Anyway a bought a prime today. 50 1.8D AF

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1130/1290126385_1ebb0fce26_b.jpg

DerekDRP

08-31-07, 10:36 PM

Thanks mate No tripod ( why its a we bit blurry. ) and its my very FIRST REAL attemp.

I think I did a smashing job for my first one..

FudgeNuggets

08-31-07, 11:05 PM

Hey gang what do you think of my first stitched iimage I went to a ball game with my brother and his wife. It was fun as heck.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y98/Docpeplvr/Baseballgame/stretchy1.jpg

Not the best image quality but great job with the stitching, I cannot tell where it is stuck together at.

DerekDRP

08-31-07, 11:20 PM

Thanks Fudge, I can tell you its about half an inch tot he left of the pole in the middle of the shot.

drenader

09-01-07, 01:25 AM

Actually a pretty good stitch job, I think you have one casualty though. It looks like the brown haired women has half a head, it might be the angle though. Must be hard doing that with a crowd of people

DerekDRP

09-01-07, 03:36 AM

FudgeNuggets

09-01-07, 07:43 AM

SolidxSnake

09-01-07, 09:05 AM

Took me a while to find where the stitch was at. Follow the glare of the light to the left (a bit to the left of the center of the image), and follow the top-left "horn" of the glare. You'll notice the relocation of the top of the net, that's the biggest giveaway IMO.

Good stitch tho

Cyrix_2k

09-01-07, 11:04 PM

I own a Canon 350D / Rebel XT along with:
18-55mm Kit Lens
OM->EF lens adapter
Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm f/3.5
Vivitar Series 1 28-90mm f/2.8-3.5
Vivitar 80-200mm f/4.5-5.6
Zuiko 50mm f/1.8
Olympus T-20 Flash
Tripod

I mostly take pictures of cars and nature, but I try just about everything. Recently, I've been playing with macro photography and with my homemade softbox.

Sorry, I always resize my pictures to 800 pixels at the largest dimension x something else.

Fireworks at Niagara Falls:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v319/Cyrix_2k/firework.jpg

Jet Boat:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v319/Cyrix_2k/purpleboat.jpg

American Falls at night:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v319/Cyrix_2k/falls_night4.jpg

Challenger:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v319/Cyrix_2k/IMG_0041.jpg

Picture of my friend:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v319/Cyrix_2k/kristen_faded.jpg

Picture of another friend during the filming of our AP Video:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v319/Cyrix_2k/sam.jpg

And one last picture from when I took over for our high school year book crew:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v319/Cyrix_2k/tom.jpg

JCLW

09-02-07, 08:51 AM

Nice pics everyone!

I'm just in the middle of trading up my 75-300 IS for the 100-400 L IS - I should get the new one next week. If I was thinking I would have done it earlier and had it for the airshow this weekend, but oh well.

Albaholic

09-07-07, 07:16 PM

I've been experimenting with night cityscape shot long exposures. It's a lot of fun. But resting my camera on the roof of a car and 30 sec exposures doesn't work so well. I think it's time to look for a quality tripod. Do you guys have any suggestions? All these different types of heads can be somewhat confusing

MRD

09-07-07, 08:02 PM

Well, I'd probably go with a Bogen/Manfrotto (same brand, different name depending on where it's supposed to be sold... I think Bogen is for America, Manfrotto is for Europe or something like that). They are very high quality but not too pricey. Even the least expensive ones are quite sturdy and nice. If you want to go even higher end, you can go with a Gitzo (John Shaw swears by them). They are very heavy and very solid, but probably overkill if you don't have some huge lenses.

As for the head, there are varying opinions on this. I personally use a 3021BN (BN just means the black version, I think it's better for nature photography than the chrome, less noticeable). The head is purchased separately, and there are many choices. If you have small lenses (28, 35, 50, 85, maybe 105), the ball heads are nice because they are very fast to adjust. You loosen, move the camera, lock down, and click. They have a very good range of motion. However, with a big lens, they tend to slip a lot. They don't work well for the heavier lenses. I personally use a 3047 3 way pan head with adapter thingy. The adapter thingy is a quick release that mounts on the camera (you can buy extras if you have more than one body). Then you can very quickly attach and detach the camera. This head supports more weight and is good for longer zooms.

This is a pretty inexpensive combo (I bought it years ago, but I'd guess $125-$150 now at most). It is a very sturdy setup that will serve you well.

The bogen system has a lot of options though, you can get a bigger, heavier tripod if you need. I'm also not that tall, so I don't need anything huge... if you're like 6'6'', you may want a bigger one.

Albaholic

09-07-07, 09:13 PM

SolidxSnake

09-07-07, 10:36 PM

Hey, I've been really debating getting an entry-level dSLR setup. I need some advice on what to get.

Personally, I've always been a Canon fan (have a consumer digicam, two printers, a digital camcorder, a consumer film camera or two, a scanner, lots of their stuff). Not to say I don't like Nikon, more that I'm not familiar with them.

For some reason, I've always associated advanced cameras (over the consumer level, at least) to all be manual focus (something about a huge camera with large lenses :)), and I've gotten used to manual focus using my friend's film SLR (yet again.. a Canon). I know Canon's whole EF lineup of lenses is geared toward AF. I'm not a big fan of the AF in all of the consumer digicams I've used, and I can only expect it to be better on the entry-level dSLRs (9-point AF, faster focusing, etc.). Is the AF worth using on most entry-level dSLRs?

Also, are all the brands competitively priced? For instance, Nikon and Canon, who's gear is more bang for the buck?

From what I've read up on so far is that they both have great gear, very little things set them apart. But mainly, I've seen that Canon's got better glass overall, whereas Nikon's got more features in their bodies.

I've been looking at the 400D to be honest.

Also, how much would a decent "starter" kit run me? Used is no concern, so long as the stuff is in good condition, lenses especially. I need the body, at least one lens (the prime kit lens is fine for now), hopefully a bag to carry around a few things in, neck strap, etc (the stuff that comes in the box). I have a cheap tripod that works well enough for now, and I've got a 5GB MicroDrive, which will work (Type2 CF) in a 400D. What would be a good set of gear to start with, is another way of phrasing my question.

DerekDRP

09-07-07, 11:28 PM

[QUOTE=SolidxSnake;5233815]

I've been looking at the 400D to be honest.

QUOTE]The 400d is very good camera. Only beef I have with it is where you plug the usb cable in to the camera it's a bit stiff and hard to open some times.

other then that I can reccommend a place for you to be able to buy the starter camera p[ack for like $600 ( thats for the XTI )

www.bhphotovideo.com

very best place to get the cool gear from. I think you may be haoppy with that.

MRD

09-08-07, 12:06 AM

Thanks for the advice MRD. I'm 5'2" i dont think i will need a gigantic tripod. I dont think I will ever have those huge expensive lenses. And im looking for something thats not too heavy. I dont really want to spend more than 200 so i think carbon fiber is not an option for me. It seems like head type really comes down to personal preference. Maybe if I can find a diagram or video illustrating the difference, it would make it a lot easier. I dont know of any place locally that sells high end tripods (id love to try them out before using them)

Well, I don't know much about camera stores in Hawaii (I live on the east coast, so we're about 7000 miles apart). I mail order stuff from B&H, which does have a nice store in NYC that I've been to a few times, but that's not going to help you much. If you're 5'2'', the cheapest bogen is more than tall enough. It's moderately heavy, but not bad really... I guess it depends how strong you are too. I wouldn't go with anything lighter though, because it won't be sturdy. As for heads you may have to settle for pictures, but maybe if you check the yellow pages you can find a store that carries them. DO NOT settle for the crappy tripods they sell at most camera stores. Even the very expensive tripods at Ritz Camera are crap compared to the Bogens and Gitzos. You will immediately feel the difference when you lay your hands on one of the good ones.

www.bogenimaging.us is the website, and gives pics and descriptions of all the products.
This webpage also lets you search by zip code or state for stores that sell their products, so you could try some out: http://www.bogenimaging.us/Jahia/site/bius/pid/8792

That might be your best bet, although you may end up paying more than you would mail order. (Of course, shipping to HI can really add up too...) Just make sure you have an idea what they go for at B&H before you buy them so you don't get ripped off.

For some reason, I've always associated advanced cameras (over the consumer level, at least) to all be manual focus (something about a huge camera with large lenses ), and I've gotten used to manual focus using my friend's film SLR (yet again.. a Canon). I know Canon's whole EF lineup of lenses is geared toward AF. I'm not a big fan of the AF in all of the consumer digicams I've used, and I can only expect it to be better on the entry-level dSLRs (9-point AF, faster focusing, etc.). Is the AF worth using on most entry-level dSLRs?

Also, are all the brands competitively priced? For instance, Nikon and Canon, who's gear is more bang for the buck?

From what I've read up on so far is that they both have great gear, very little things set them apart. But mainly, I've seen that Canon's got better glass overall, whereas Nikon's got more features in their bodies.

Both Nikon and Canon are comparable for the most part, and pros use both. (Nikon is the most used brand by pros by a good margin, Canon is second, and Minolta is a distant 3rd I think, although they've been losing market share.) In general, Nikon has the reputation for the best optics, Canon has a reputation for more bells and whistles and fancy features. The nice thing about Nikon is that your stuff doesn't go obsolete ever. You can put a lens from 1959 on a brand new camera. It won't autofocus of course, but it will work to the extent that it was designed to (some very old lenses have to be sent away to be modified to be AI). Canon is constantly changing its lens mounts, flash shoes, etc., so every time you upgrade your Canon body, you have to sell all your gear and start over with new lenses, flashes, accessories, etc. This is why I prefer Nikon. I have a lot of nice lenses for my 35mm AF camera. These will work on my digital bodies, or they'd work on an old manual focus Nikon FM. I love the fact that they don't keep trying to force me to upgrade the whole system.

Nikon also has a better reputation for ruggedness and long term durability. You can go to ebay and buy a Nikon F (from 1959) that still works. I think Audioaficionado still uses an F2... this was Nikon's pro camera released in 1970. Totally manual. In skilled hands, it can take amazing photos. Canon uses more plastic, Nikon uses more metal in bodies. Nikon bodies also weigh more by a good amount. (Nikon F4S, F5, F6 weigh a ton, but they're VERY durable.)

However, either brand can deliver excellent quality pictures and there are pros that swear by both. Once you have a good Nikon setup, you'll never go Canon, because upgrading the camera to a new Nikon is a small expense since you can keep all your lenses/flashes/accessories, but going to Canon means replacing everything. The opposite is not true, since if you upgrade your Canon, you have to upgrade everything else anyways, so you can consider Nikon and Canon on equal terms.

AF is very nice now and I use it a lot, but I would NEVER buy an SLR that didn't let me override it and use manual focus. Same deal with autoexposure... you have to be able to override everything manually. As long as you have the choice, having the automatic options is nice. I tend to use autoexposure and shift the various aperture/shutter combinations with the dial, and I use exposure compensation when I want to increase or decrease the exposure because I have a better understanding than the meter. (e.g. If the subject is backlit, I'll open up a stop or 2 to get the main subject properly exposed... the camera meter will screw this up and make it a silhouette. Spot metering is also great for this, which my camera has and I absolutely love.) Also, try to get a camera with a depth of field preview button. These are getting rare, but are actually incredibly important.

Finally, if you're looking for a cheap starter kit, don't worry about fancy new features. Worry about optics. Put less money into the camera and more into the lenses... they matter more. With film cameras, any old camera will do. With digital, you do need a certain pixel count for good quality. If you can use generation old lenses, do that if you're on a tight budget. Better to have a very high quality piece of glass that doesn't have every feature, maybe that doesn't autofocus, than to have low quality glass that has all the fancy features. If you go Nikon, I hate the G series lenses... they're low quality and not up to normal Nikon standards.

SolidxSnake

09-08-07, 12:24 AM

The nice thing about Nikon is that your stuff doesn't go obsolete ever. You can put a lens from 1959 on a brand new camera. It won't autofocus of course, but it will work to the extent that it was designed to (some very old lenses have to be sent away to be modified to be AI). Canon is constantly changing its lens mounts, flash shoes, etc., so every time you upgrade your Canon body, you have to sell all your gear and start over with new lenses, flashes, accessories, etc. This is why I prefer Nikon. I have a lot of nice lenses for my 35mm AF camera. These will work on my digital bodies, or they'd work on an old manual focus Nikon FM. I love the fact that they don't keep trying to force me to upgrade the whole system.

That was the reason I was considering Nikon as well, the F mount has been around forever. Canon's 400D appealed to me greatly, but I was pretty wary of getting an EOS Camera now, only to have Canon change lens mounts and such again. I'm sure both Canon and Nikon have comparable optics, I've heard praise for both.

Good to know the automatic features are reasonable, at least. I'll still probably be shooting manual most of the time, just because I'm a control freak :)

Also, DOF-Preview is very important to me as well... I know all of Canon's bodies have the button on the front.

On a side note, I'm probably getting a good deal of Minolta stuff. My uncle is going to give me a Minolta Film SLR setup, I think he has 3-4 lenses (a prime, wide-angle, telephoto, and one other I can't think of), a bag, a good tripod, a flash, etc. I've heard wonders about Minolta... Shame they disbanded and sold their stuff to Sony :(

JCLW

09-08-07, 01:28 AM

I started off with Canon so that's where I am now. It's not like the lens mounts change every year - the EF lenses have been around over 20yrs. You can even get adapters to mount Nikon F lenses on Canon EOS bodies (without any automatic features).

I must disagree with MRD - Canon doesn't change specs every time they release a new body. Canon may change things around every 25yrs to Nikon's 50yrs but it's not like they get changed every week. And who knows - Nikon may switch to a new mount tomorrow, and Canon may keep the EF mount for another 25yrs.

The ruggedness of the camera also depends on the specific body. For example my 10D has a magnesium alloy body while it's equivalent, the D100, has a polycarbonate shell around a steel frame.

But anyways, enough of that. Both companies make good gear.

I do agree with MRD about optics. The lens is the important part. If you get a Canon kit get the 17-85 IS USM lens, not the standard 18-55 kit lens.

Albaholic

09-08-07, 06:54 AM

That was the reason I was considering Nikon as well, the F mount has been around forever. Canon's 400D appealed to me greatly, but I was pretty wary of getting an EOS Camera now, only to have Canon change lens mounts and such again. I'm sure both Canon and Nikon have comparable optics, I've heard praise for both.

Good to know the automatic features are reasonable, at least. I'll still probably be shooting manual most of the time, just because I'm a control freak :)

Also, DOF-Preview is very important to me as well... I know all of Canon's bodies have the button on the front.

On a side note, I'm probably getting a good deal of Minolta stuff. My uncle is going to give me a Minolta Film SLR setup, I think he has 3-4 lenses (a prime, wide-angle, telephoto, and one other I can't think of), a bag, a good tripod, a flash, etc. I've heard wonders about Minolta... Shame they disbanded and sold their stuff to Sony :(

Both Canon and Nikon have a great Lens lineup. Nikons have DOF preview as well. Canon vs Nikon like someone else said, is the photography version of AMDvs Intel. My suggestion would be to go to a camera store and try out the demos to see whihc you're most comfortable with. And if possible rent some of the bodies you are thinking about buying. After all you may change bodies but the majority of your money is going to go into their respective lens systems. It can be quite an investment.

Camacho111

09-08-07, 08:00 AM

Both Canon and Nikon have a great Lens lineup. Nikons have DOF preview as well. Canon vs Nikon like someone else said, is the photography version of AMDvs Intel. My suggestion would be to go to a camera store and try out the demos to see whihc you're most comfortable with. And if possible rent some of the bodies you are thinking about buying. After all you may change bodies but the majority of your money is going to go into their respective lens systems. It can be quite an investment.

Both brands have a price point for everybody. Figure a budget and stick to it. Look into feature that you may need in the future. Wireless flashes, blowing up a wall size PIC. etc.This hobby is more expensive than computing. IMHO.

MRD

09-08-07, 09:35 AM

SolidxSnake

09-08-07, 09:48 AM

Nikon also has a far, far more elaborate flash system, if that's important to you.

I agree in the end though that it really comes down to personal preference. Either system can do pretty much anything you'd need.

Sounds good. I'm not experienced at all at flash photography (nor do I really have any interest to experiment with it just yet).

I'm guessing the Nikon equivalent of the 400D is the 40D?

Camacho111

09-08-07, 10:26 AM

Sounds good. I'm not experienced at all at flash photography (nor do I really have any interest to experiment with it just yet).

I'm guessing the Nikon equivalent of the 400D is the 40D?

You mean D40? More like the D80, soon to be replace by a D90 rumors has it.

Now remember there two D40 versions. D40 6mp and D40X 10mp.

ADD:
Here is a link to Nikons' CLS

http://www.nikonusa.com/fileuploads/speedoflight/splash.html

1cem4n

09-09-07, 03:44 AM

i know the d40x was supposed to compete with the canon rebel xti. i want to see what nikon comes out with to compete with the new 40d.

ryanmartini

09-09-07, 12:16 PM

I just got my Canon Digital Rebel in :) It may not be top of the line, but I am having fun with it :)

MRD

09-09-07, 05:19 PM

What's the pixel count on that?

SolidxSnake

09-09-07, 06:29 PM

I believe the Digital Rebel is 6.1MP, the XT is 8.somethingMP and the XTi is 10.1MP.

DerekDRP

09-09-07, 06:34 PM

I believe the Digital Rebel is 6.1MP, the XT is 8.somethingMP and the XTi is 10.1MP.You're correct the XTI is 10.2 mb's

ryanmartini

09-09-07, 09:17 PM

DerekDRP

09-09-07, 11:14 PM

Hey gang how do I update my 400d? I went to the canon's updater page and they have a new 1.1.0 update for the 400d but no download file lol.

Cyrix_2k

09-09-07, 11:30 PM

Hey gang how do I update my 400d? I went to the canon's updater page and they have a new 1.1.0 update for the 400d but no download file lol.
hmm, that's odd. I've never updated my 350D, but from I what I understand, you download the file (once it becomes available, maybe try another browser?) then copy it to a CF card and turn the camera on.

Cyrix_2k

09-09-07, 11:32 PM

Yeah it is the 6.1, but makes very nice pics. I am mainly waiting for my new Canon 75-300mm USM lens to come in. I got some great pics of the parties outside the football stadium at FSU's home game :) Im seeing what I need to do to be on the sidelines to take pics and be a guest contributor to the newspaper here at FSU.
nice. The lens is the important part. The vast majority of my pictures end up a) being posted on the web and b) as 4x6s. You don't much resolution past 3MP except as extra room to crop. The best part about your camera is the per-pixel sharpness should actually be better than an XT or an XTi since less pixels are crammed into the same space. Have fun!

Albaholic

09-10-07, 12:53 AM

Hey gang how do I update my 400d? I went to the canon's updater page and they have a new 1.1.0 update for the 400d but no download file lol.

It should be just like doing a firmware update for a pc.. once you get the file

DerekDRP

09-10-07, 01:04 AM

Albaholic thanks I will do that tomarrow.

MRD

09-10-07, 03:06 AM

I agree, lens is more important than camera. In the old days, while most people put all the money into the camera bodies, real photographers would tell you to buy a cheap body and put the money in the lenses. That is still mostly true, although today with digital, there is a need for a high pixel count if you want good quality. Fortunately, the pixel counts are going up a lot. Almost all SLR's are at least 6 mp now, and many are 10+.

bing

09-10-07, 06:28 AM

Mine, mediocre system with only single lens : :(

Nikon D80
AF-S Nikkor 18-200mm 1:3.5-5.6 G ED-IF DX VR
Nikon Close-up No.6-T

Pic of the cam it self with lens petruded to max zoom, shot with crappy cellular phone cam.
59427

Never had enough quality time with it, too busy. :confused:

Albaholic

09-10-07, 03:48 PM

Looks good bing. now start putting that thing to use :ber:

SolidxSnake

09-10-07, 03:51 PM

You know alba, I should have traded all my oldschool parts for some photography gear... $100 would probably get me half a good lens :D

BTW, you've got all that stuff right?

MRD

09-10-07, 04:03 PM

Albaholic

09-10-07, 06:26 PM

You know alba, I should have traded all my oldschool parts for some photography gear... $100 would probably get me half a good lens :D

BTW, you've got all that stuff right?

Yeah I do. I couldn't think of anything i would want to let go of. Well maybe my 50mm 1.8 in favor of the 50mm 1.4. I just bought the D80 and a 60mm micro lens yesterday. My intention was to keep the D80 as backup while my d200 gets serviced. But I think I will return it since I can use my P&S for a while.

I'm still waiting to make the leap to digital. It really is the future, film stuff is hardly even made, and I always hated to wait to get stuff developed.

I just have a hard time dropping the cash for a nikon d-slr that does everything I want. I figure maybe wait a few more years on the technology. I love my 8008s, but film is so dead now.

I never had the chance to shoot with a film SLR. I feel like I should try though.

MRD

09-10-07, 07:01 PM

You must be a lot younger than me.

I learned photography with a Ricoh KR-10 and a 50mm f/2 lens. We used plus-x (125) and tri-x (400) black and white film which we developed ourselves and printed in the lab. Darkroom work is fun actually.

SolidxSnake

09-10-07, 07:11 PM

I never had the chance to shoot with a film SLR. I feel like I should try though.

Trade you a Minolta or a Canon film SLR setup (canon setup has 3 lenses, two polarizing filters and a telephoto converter) for one of your digital setups :santa:

bing

09-10-07, 07:11 PM

I'm still waiting to make the leap to digital. It really is the future, film stuff is hardly even made, and I always hated to wait to get stuff developed.

I just have a hard time dropping the cash for a nikon d-slr that does everything I want. I figure maybe wait a few more years on the technology. I love my 8008s, but film is so dead now.

QFT, leave alone the waiting, just can't imagine carrying rolls of film anymore like in the old days, and loosing the capabilities to shoot frames like a machine gun without worrying to reload another roll or worrying crappy shot. :)

I never had the chance to shoot with a film SLR. I feel like I should try though.

NOOOOO ! It will feels like making fire with a flint stone to cook instead of using microwave ! :D

Audioaficionado

09-10-07, 07:34 PM

Mine, mediocre system with only single lens : :(

Nikon D80
AF-S Nikkor 18-200mm 1:2.5-5.6 G ED-IF DX VR
Nikon Close-up No.6-T
Never had enough quality time with it, too busy. :confused:Must be nice to be a professional photographer and/or a millionaire :rolleyes:

Your camera and lens are fiscally far out of reach for most of us.

I have a Nikon F2. I'd trade you in a heartbeat as that's exactly the combo I'd get.

With that lens you would hardly ever have to change it in the field and every time you do change it, more dust gets in.

Right now my digital camera is a simple but nice P&S Olympus D-460 Zoom with 1.3mpx I bought from the OCF classifieds for $50.

It's good for desktop pics and web shots but it doesn't have the res for 35mm quality photos.

bing

09-10-07, 07:52 PM

Yeah, that was what I planned when I bought it at the 1st time, it fits me well as a single carrying around lens that still covers enough comfortable range.

Correction its 3.5-5.6, not 2.5-5.6, typo, other wise it will like carrying a bazooka ! LMAO :D

Hey, your P&S still can beat mine, if you've spent enough quality time with her.

It is all about the cooking and the taste, not the utensils ! ;)

-

Audioaficionado

09-10-07, 08:29 PM

The DSLRs have a lot more controls than P&S or SLR like cameras but at the cost of more complexity and a lot more weight to carry around.

I remember several times when I wanted to shoot some pictures on the spur of the moment but decided to pass on the urge when I thought of all the hassles setting everything up prior to leaving for the shoot.

A good P&S in a photographers hands can give excellent results and even get pictures that might not have been possible in a given situation.

I'd love a Nikon DSLR but I think I'll get the much more affordable Cannon S3 IS for now.

For my hands and eyes, the Nikon is the only camera that feels like it was made just for me. My hands and fingers just land on the perfect resting areas near the controls and the viewfinder is brighter than the Canon's.

bing

09-10-07, 08:42 PM

hmm.. if that is the case, sounds like you need a dslr badly, and its a Nikon and "nothing else" ! LOL :D

-

Audioaficionado

09-10-07, 09:11 PM

hmm.. if that is the case, sounds like you need a dslr badly, and its a Nikon and "nothing else" ! LOL :DWell the S3 is $$$ and the Nikon is $$$$. I have <$$$$ to work with :(

JCLW

09-10-07, 09:12 PM

I never had the chance to shoot with a film SLR. I feel like I should try though.
You can usually pick up simple used film bodies for next to nothing at a pawn shop, garage sale, or whatever. I still drag out my old Rebel G every other blue moon.

edit: New toy and old toy:
http://img74.imageshack.us/img74/6587/img1563ao7.jpg

Albaholic

09-10-07, 10:48 PM

QFT, leave alone the waiting, just can't imagine carrying rolls of film anymore like in the old days, and loosing the capabilities to shoot frames like a machine gun without worrying to reload another roll or worrying crappy shot. :)

NOOOOO ! It will feels like making fire with a flint stone to cook instead of using microwave ! :D

I dont know.. film shots seem to have an endearing quality about them. When i was shooting film. I felt more attached to what i was doing.. Cooking with fire ftw i love bbq'ing

Mine, mediocre system with only single lens : :(

Nikon D80
AF-S Nikkor 18-200mm 1:3.5-5.6 G ED-IF DX VR
Nikon Close-up No.6-T

Pic of the cam it self with lens petruded to max zoom, shot with crappy cellular phone cam.

Never had enough quality time with it, too busy. :confused:

Sometimes I feel the same way. I don't spend as much time with my comp anymore but I find myself taking more pix and experimenting more. I'm sure I'll come back to pc's eventually. I always do.

You must be a lot younger than me.

I learned photography with a Ricoh KR-10 and a 50mm f/2 lens. We used plus-x (125) and tri-x (400) black and white film which we developed ourselves and printed in the lab. Darkroom work is fun actually.

I'll be 23 this weekend. I did shoot with a film p&s for my high school yearbook and journalism classes. Developing film sounds like a lot of fun. I'd love my own darkroom.

Trade you a Minolta or a Canon film SLR setup (canon setup has 3 lenses, two polarizing filters and a telephoto converter) for one of your digital setups :santa:

By January next year I will have the d80 (if I decide to keep it) , my d200 and a d300. I'm also looking for some film slr's on ebay. I'd prefer to stick with nikon because i have the glass.

I have a Nikon F2. I'd trade you in a heartbeat as that's exactly the combo I'd get.

With that lens you would hardly ever have to change it in the field and every time you do change it, more dust gets in.

I love the F2 it is a nice camera. Anybody know about sensor cleaning? I change lenses quite a bit and last night while doing some really long exposures of the night sky (2hr+) I noticed smudges and what looked like dust on my sensor. Im not hard core enough to clean it myself even though I have the copperhill sensor cleaning kit.

Yeah, that was what I planned when I bought it at the 1st time, it fits me well as a single carrying around lens that still covers enough comfortable range.

Correction its 3.5-5.6, not 2.5-5.6, typo, other wise it will like carrying a bazooka ! LMAO :D

Hey, your P&S still can beat mine, if you've spent enough quality time with her.

It is all about the cooking and the taste, not the utensils ! ;)

-

I've had my 18-200 since last december and it hardly ever gets used. I just dont like variable app. But it is useful when you absolutely cannot change lenses. I'm going to a concert later this month and I'm thinking I should only bring this lens.

The DSLRs have a lot more controls than P&S or SLR like cameras but at the cost of more complexity and a lot more weight to carry around.

I remember several times when I wanted to shoot some pictures on the spur of the moment but decided to pass on the urge when I thought of all the hassles setting everything up prior to leaving for the shoot.

A good P&S in a photographers hands can give excellent results and even get pictures that might not have been possible in a given situation.

I'd love a Nikon DSLR but I think I'll get the much more affordable Cannon S3 IS for now.

For my hands and eyes, the Nikon is the only camera that feels like it was made just for me. My hands and fingers just land on the perfect resting areas near the controls and the viewfinder is brighter than the Canon's.

Not trying to sound like a fanboy here but there is something about Nikon ergonomics and design that just feel right

You can usually pick up simple used film bodies for next to nothing at a pawn shop, garage sale, or whatever. I still drag out my old Rebel G every other blue moon.

edit: New toy and old toy:

I am looking for some SLR bodies as i type. That lens is a monster. Cant wait to see what u do with it

MRD

09-11-07, 12:48 AM

Alba, if you do buy a used Nikon film SLR, I'd highly recommend the F100. That camera did everything the pro cameras did, and for a fraction of the price, and now you can get them for a song on ebay if you are willing to go used. The professional cameras are of course nice too (F5/F6 or even the F4s, which is a bit older, but they are pricier). The F100 went for well over $1000 new and its technology is state of the art in every way except that it uses film. They run around $200 on ebay.

If you want even cheaper, I'd go with the N80. Those run about $100 used on ebay, and still have lots of features. The F100 has the real pro features though, things like mirror lock up and such that you won't think you'll need, but you will someday.

Audioaficionado

09-11-07, 12:23 PM

My F2 has a stuck shutter :(

I found a well qualified guy in the UK who specializes in repairing older Nikon F series cameras. I have to decide if I should send it to him or just put the $$$ towards a D80.

MRD

09-11-07, 03:40 PM

There's a certain cool/retro factor to owning an F2. Especially if it works. =P

Albaholic

09-18-07, 04:37 AM

An ever so generous Bday preset from my parents. Can't wait to start using it
I really need to clean my sensor
http://obsessionwithfire.com/newtoy.gif

ryanmartini

09-18-07, 09:15 AM

update: got my 75-300mm lens in. Pleasant surprise! Came with original box, packing, both lens covers, warranty card and manual! :D

Pretty good deal for 115$ :)

MRD

09-18-07, 12:59 PM

That looks very much like my tripod Alba. I love that tripod. Very stable and very flexible.

Some people saw off part of the support post btw... it allows you to get way down to the ground, since the tripod opens up all the way... and if I recall correctly, you're not tall, so you probably won't need the extra height. John Shaw always claims you shouldn't use those posts for extra height, as they increase camera shake... although I don't think they do very much.

Albaholic

09-18-07, 01:44 PM

update: got my 75-300mm lens in. Pleasant surprise! Came with original box, packing, both lens covers, warranty card and manual! :D

Pretty good deal for 115$ :)

Nice, I'm assuming you got that from ebay.

That looks very much like my tripod Alba. I love that tripod. Very stable and very flexible.

Some people saw off part of the support post btw... it allows you to get way down to the ground, since the tripod opens up all the way... and if I recall correctly, you're not tall, so you probably won't need the extra height. John Shaw always claims you shouldn't use those posts for extra height, as they increase camera shake... although I don't think they do very much.

Yeah its the 3001. I forget which head I have, but it's just a basic pan and tilt. I'd love to be able to do lower angles with my tripod. I don't feel like hacking up my center column though. I'll check to see if i can get another one on ebay for cheap

ryanmartini

09-18-07, 03:09 PM

@ Albaholic, Yes it is an ebay steal. :)

MRD

09-18-07, 03:45 PM

Yeah its the 3001. I forget which head I have, but it's just a basic pan and tilt. I'd love to be able to do lower angles with my tripod. I don't feel like hacking up my center column though. I'll check to see if i can get another one on ebay for cheap

I would bet you can get one from ebay or bogen and swap them out. They might even make a short one. You don't really want to use the center pole much anyways, since it wobbles some, but I too have a hard time hacking up something nice and new that I just bought, even if that's not logical.

One of the really nice things about those tripods is that they open all the way out. The legs can all be flat against the ground if you want them to be... it gives you a lot more flexibility.

I'm sure you can tell already though that just picking up a Bogen tripod, it's nothing like the cheapies you get at most camera stores. It's in a whole different league, and it really will give you greater flexibility and more stability.

Camacho111

09-18-07, 04:06 PM

An ever so generous Bday preset from my parents. Can't wait to start using it
I really need to clean my sensor

I was trying to figure out what you meant with the sensor. Now I see all that dirt in the image! our worst nightmare.

Albaholic

09-18-07, 05:07 PM

I would bet you can get one from ebay or bogen and swap them out. They might even make a short one. You don't really want to use the center pole much anyways, since it wobbles some, but I too have a hard time hacking up something nice and new that I just bought, even if that's not logical.

One of the really nice things about those tripods is that they open all the way out. The legs can all be flat against the ground if you want them to be... it gives you a lot more flexibility.

I'm sure you can tell already though that just picking up a Bogen tripod, it's nothing like the cheapies you get at most camera stores. It's in a whole different league, and it really will give you greater flexibility and more stability.

I love it so far. I'm not ready to hack it up yet.I keep seeing certain reviews on converting the center column to a horizontal arm. but i didnt find any guides on how to do it.

I was trying to figure out what you meant with the sensor. Now I see all that dirt in the image! our worst nightmare.

Yep, sending it in to nikon next month. I dont have the guts to clean the sensor myself. Although some of that dirt may be on my door and not the sensor.

MRD

09-18-07, 05:51 PM

It looks like you can buy interchangeable center column posts anyways for that tripod.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=search&A=search&Q=&sb=bs%2Cupper%28ds%29&sq=asc&ac=&bsi=&ci=402&shs=&at=Brand_Bogen+%2F+Manfrotto

Camacho111

09-18-07, 06:30 PM

I love it so far. I'm not ready to hack it up yet.I keep seeing certain reviews on converting the center column to a horizontal arm. but i didnt find any guides on how to do it.

Yep, sending it in to nikon next month. I dont have the guts to clean the sensor myself. Although some of that dirt may be on my door and not the sensor.

I was super desprate last week. I blow into the body and siliva hit the sensor while the shutter was locked. Swabbed with a very damp tip, followed by a dry swab. <<<not recommended. but it worked.:bday:

JCLW

09-18-07, 08:19 PM

I've been pretty busy but I took a few with the new lens.

100-400 @400 (x1.6 = 640mm), f/11, 1/125, ISO 200, IS-2, shot from a moving boat:
http://img125.imageshack.us/img125/9017/img1542un6.jpg
Bombardier Dash 8-400 (Q400)

SolidxSnake

09-18-07, 08:40 PM

I've been pretty busy but I took a few with the new lens.

100-400 @400 (x1.6 = 640mm), f/11, 1/125, ISO 200, IS-2, shot from a moving boat:
<snip>
Bombardier Dash 8-400 (Q400)

That's a cool pic! :thup:

JCLW

09-18-07, 08:49 PM

Thanks, the Q400 above is roughly half the original size.

100-400 @400 (x1.6 = 640mm), f/8, 1/500, ISO 200, IS-1, shot from a moving boat, 100% crop:
http://img487.imageshack.us/img487/9158/img1540xw3.jpg
Cessna Skyhawk SP

SolidxSnake

09-18-07, 09:03 PM

Those are really nice shots, very stable for a moving and rocking boat.

JCLW

09-18-07, 09:47 PM

50mm f/1.4 (x1.6 = 80mm), f/2.5, 1/30, ISO 400, aprox 1/3rd of original size:
http://img479.imageshack.us/img479/3554/img1621qt5.jpg

JCLW

09-18-07, 09:51 PM

100-400 @105 (x1.6 = 168mm), f/6.7, 1/250, ISO 400, aprox 1/3rd of original size:
http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/5989/img1598gk6.jpg
I didn't notice the plane (or the seagull) at the time.

JCLW

09-18-07, 09:54 PM

The CN tower is no longer the tallest free-standing structure, so this seemed fitting:

24-85 @40 (x1.6 = 64mm), f/11, 1/350, ISO 200, aprox 1/3rd of original size:
http://img478.imageshack.us/img478/9814/img1558xr1.jpg

JCLW

09-18-07, 10:03 PM

I try and I try to get a sharp picture of Toronto's skyline at night (or dusk) from the far side of the island, but I just can't do it from the boats. If the timing was better I'd get it while it was lighter and just underexpose it - but then you lose the sunset colours.

They have cool light displays on the CN tower now.

50mm f/1.4 (x1.6 = 80mm), f/2.5, 1/30, ISO 400, aprox 1/3rd of original size:
http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/6806/img1616yu2.jpg

Albaholic

09-19-07, 12:50 AM

i really like that sailboat one

Speciale

09-19-07, 10:01 PM

Fits my recent state of mind...you might say.

http://photos-c.ak.facebook.com/photos-ak-sf2p/v132/236/6/14827881/n14827881_36386266_8344.jpg

Albaholic

09-20-07, 02:23 PM

Nice, what do u shoot with?

Speciale

09-20-07, 04:24 PM

Nice, what do u shoot with?

A camera...and a 60 watt lamp.

SolidxSnake

09-20-07, 06:23 PM

Speciale

09-20-07, 06:29 PM

I played with my friend's Canon 20D today, thing was awesome to use. I only took a few shots with it, but I can't imagine how many shots I could take with it if it were my camera. He has a Canon L-Series lens... when I saw that I was in awe :D

That sensation fades. But i am gonna warn you to steer clear, otherwise your budget may take a hit.

That said, there are a ton of great canon lenses that don't bear the red ring

28 1.8 (used in my photo above)
50 1.4
85 1.8
135 f/2.8 (soft focus)
a few macro lenses as well.

Oh, and you can pick up a "20D" without the digital sensor for about $100 ;)

Albaholic

09-20-07, 06:47 PM

That sensation fades. But i am gonna warn you to steer clear, otherwise your budget may take a hit.

Indeed Ive spent a lot more on photog gear than I have on my rig.

SolidxSnake

09-20-07, 06:48 PM

That sensation fades. But i am gonna warn you to steer clear, otherwise your budget may take a hit.

That said, there are a ton of great canon lenses that don't bear the red ring

28 1.8 (used in my photo above)
50 1.4
85 1.8
135 f/2.8 (soft focus)
a few macro lenses as well.

Oh, and you can pick up a "20D" without the digital sensor for about $100 ;)

Yeah, I know. I wanna stick with digital so I don't have to deal with film and developing it, as well as having to wait to see if my shots came out.

I wasn't planning on getting an L-series, that's absolutely ridiculous. I was just shocked that he had one.

I was thinking on getting the f/1.4 50mm lens after the kit lens (goes for around $300 new, it's sturdier and faster than the f/1.8 model).

Speciale

09-20-07, 06:53 PM

Indeed Ive spent a lot more on photog gear than I have on my rig.

Oh, by far.

Speciale

09-20-07, 06:55 PM

Yeah, I know. I wanna stick with digital so I don't have to deal with film and developing it, as well as having to wait to see if my shots came out.

I wasn't planning on getting an L-series, that's absolutely ridiculous. I was just shocked that he had one.

I was thinking on getting the f/1.4 50mm lens after the kit lens (goes for around $300 new, it's sturdier and faster than the f/1.8 model).

I'm not gonna steer you away from a great lens...but for a person in your shoes (IE without much gear) i think you're money could be better invested.

Although the 1.4 is better built and operates slightly better then the 1.8 (AF is worlds better), the 1.8 is just such a damn fine lens for $70. You could then put that extra $230 towards another lens...such as the 28 1.8 or even a flash.

Money is rarely poorly spent on camera gear though, if you buy good stuff it holds its value.

MRD

09-20-07, 07:39 PM

Indeed Ive spent a lot more on photog gear than I have on my rig.

Certain types of photo gear hold value much better and do not reach obsolescence in the same way as computer gear. A good lens will last you forever. A lifetime maybe, especially if it's Nikon since they have a commitment to non-obsolescence that other companies don't have (they preserve lens mounts etc.)

My N8008S has lost a lot of value, as have all film cameras. However, my lenses really haven't. I have a 24mm 2.8 D, 50mm 1.4 D, 60mm 2.8 D Micro, 105mm 2.8 D Micro, and all of these still sell for the same or more than when I bought them.

Buy *anything* computer related and it's value plummets within a year, especially if it is high end.

Optics just don't change that much. Camera bodies do devalue more... they are more like computers.

IAmMoen

09-20-07, 07:58 PM

I'm not gonna steer you away from a great lens...but for a person in your shoes (IE without much gear) i think you're money could be better invested.

Although the 1.4 is better built and operates slightly better then the 1.8 (AF is worlds better), the 1.8 is just such a damn fine lens for $70. You could then put that extra $230 towards another lens...such as the 28 1.8 or even a flash.

Money is rarely poorly spent on camera gear though, if you buy good stuff it holds its value.

I actually have the 1.8 50mm. I do really like it though and I got it for $75 shipped. So yea. Bang for the buck is great.

MRD

09-20-07, 08:24 PM

I used to have a 50 1.8 Nikkor but I sold it and bought the 1.4. Both are great lenses though.

Albaholic

09-20-07, 08:43 PM

Ive been thinking about doing the same. But the 1.8 is cheap enough to hold on to.

SolidxSnake

09-23-07, 04:52 PM

MRD

09-23-07, 06:12 PM

I'd go for pixel count over interface.

Speciale

09-23-07, 07:02 PM

I'd go for image quality personally...

Audioaficionado

09-23-07, 07:36 PM

I'd go for pixel count over interface.

I'd go for image quality personally...Both are important as they aren't mutually exclusive.

I have excellent optics in my 1.3mpx Olympus D460-Z and it has a great image quality for its limitations but it's lack of pixels limits what I can do with the images.

Now a 10+mpx Nikon D80 will give me both, albeit for over 20x the price I paid for the Olympus.

I think the Canon S3 SI 6mpx will have to be the compromise I can live with while in college.

I think this is going to be a higher priority than even a quad core processor. That and a couple of 500GB mirrored hard drives to store all my images on LOL.

MRD

09-23-07, 07:40 PM

SolidxSnake

09-23-07, 08:09 PM

On that note, does anyone have experience with both of the cameras in question?

Audioaficionado

09-23-07, 08:19 PM

I would go for pixel count specifically for image quality reasons. However, I'd also weigh other image quality concerns, but most of those are optical (i.e. in the lenses, not the body). The most important consideration of the camera body for high quality photos is the pixel count.If you cram too many pixels into a small less expensive sensor, there ends up being too much noise and other problems that often reduce the image quality below that of similar sized but lesser pixel count sensors. To get lots of pixels and a larger sensor you need to step up into pro/semi-pro cameras like the Nikon D80 or above.On that note, does anyone have experience with both of the cameras in question?Try this site for excellent reviews on cameras.
http://www.dpreview.com/
The Nikon D80 looks and feels like a dream in my hands but YMMV.
You need to actually handle and look through any cameras you are considering.

Cyrix_2k

09-23-07, 08:28 PM

Well, I've been looking into getting an SLR recently. I saw a great deal on a 400D in the classies for $600, but too early for me (I don't have any money, it's probably gonna be an x-mas gift from the 'rents). I'm looking to stick with Canon, as I'm getting everything brand new (thus, it doesn't matter that the current Canon lineup doesn't support FD lenses, only EF lenses, unlike the Nikon F-mount). Plus, a few of my friends have Canon gear that I could probably use if I asked. Also, Canon stuff seems cheaper, though I haven't done much research on Nikon stuff (and I'm staying away from Sony, Olympus, Pentax, etc.).

My biggest question is, would it be worth getting a reasonably old mid-range SLR (ie. 20D) or a current entry-level (400D)? I can get a 400D and a 20D for around the same price more or less. The 400D has a better sensor IIRC, but the interface isn't as smooth as the 20D from what I've seen (the QCD is helpful).
I'll start off by telling you that I have a 350D which shares its body with the 400D. It feels like a toy. I will also tell you that 8 mp's is MORE than enough, so feel free to ignore pixel count unless you're frequently printing poster size prints. The interface and build of the camera body is FAR more important imo. I would go with the 20D without a second of doubt. It is a far more serious camera than the 350D/400D though the image quality of both cameras is excellent. The body of the 350D/400D is also a bit small for my liking... I never believed anyone until after I owned the camera. I have small hands and even so, the body still doesn't offer a large enough grip. Do yourself a favor and get the 20D.

SolidxSnake

09-23-07, 08:38 PM

I'll start off by telling you that I have a 350D which shares its body with the 400D. It feels like a toy. I will also tell you that 8 mp's is MORE than enough, so feel free to ignore pixel count unless you're frequently printing poster size prints. The interface and build of the camera body is FAR more important imo. I would go with the 20D without a second of doubt. It is a far more serious camera than the 350D/400D though the image quality of both cameras is excellent. The body of the 350D/400D is also a bit small for my liking... I never believed anyone until after I owned the camera. I have small hands and even so, the body still doesn't offer a large enough grip. Do yourself a favor and get the 20D.

I've played around with the 350D/400D... I'm not really concerned with how it feels, it's still a solid camera, plastic or not. The 400D has a slightly different body (check the review/preview at www.dpreview.com, it's got a rollover comparison).

Audioaficionado: Way ahead of you, I've been reading up at DPReview for a while :)

edit: I think Cyrix is right: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_eos400d%2Ccanon_eos350d%2Ccanon_eos2 0d%2Ccanon_eosd60&show=all

Cyrix_2k

09-23-07, 08:54 PM

I've played around with the 350D/400D... I'm not really concerned with how it feels, it's still a solid camera, plastic or not. The 400D has a slightly different body (check the review/preview at www.dpreview.com, it's got a rollover comparison).

Audioaficionado: Way ahead of you, I've been reading up at DPReview for a while :)

edit: I think Cyrix is right: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_eos400d%2Ccanon_eos350d%2Ccanon_eos2 0d%2Ccanon_eosd60&show=all
The 350D/400D are almost identical. Maybe you're confusing the 300D and 350D? I've used both the 350D and 400D, just not the 20D. The 20D has several features that make it more attractive: a faster shutter (which is handy!!! There have been several cases where I could've used it), faster burst shooting, ISO 3200 (yes, there are ways to this with the 350D/400D, but it's much nicer just to have the setting), the second command knob (WAY better than the 400D), able to set WB in kelvin, PC connector for the flash, shutter rated for more shots before failure, and a better build. It's the way to go. What is better about the 400D? It has the 30D's autofocus which can be nice, automatic dust reduction which is almost useless imo (the sensor is very easy to clean. You still need to clean the serious dust off anyway.), a better LCD (and they got rid of the cool small monochrome LCD), and a bit better resolution.

JCLW

09-23-07, 10:32 PM

Most of what I was thinking of saying has already been said so I won't repeat it.

Personally I would lean towards the 20D, but you should really play around with both to see what is more natural/comfortable for yourself.

SolidxSnake

09-23-07, 10:59 PM

JCLW

09-23-07, 11:01 PM

100-400 @400 (x1.6 = 640mm), f/9.5, 1/750, ISO 200, IS-1, 100% crop:
http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/3360/img1699ik5.jpg

100-400 @400 (x1.6 = 640mm), f/8, 1/350, ISO 200, IS-1, 100% crop:
http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/6584/img1777ce9.jpg

Speciale

09-23-07, 11:02 PM

Yummmm

http://photos-d.ak.facebook.com/photos-ak-sf2p/v132/236/6/14827881/n14827881_36425391_4024.jpg

JCLW

09-24-07, 10:37 PM

Yeah, I've been leaning towards the 20D myself. For a starter kit, I was thinking the 20D plus all box accessories, a 50mm f/1.8 Prime, and my 5GB MicroDrive for the moment. I really want to get the 50mm f/1.4, as it has the USM motor, but I don't think I can spend that much.

In addition, what EF zoom lenses would you guys recommend me? I like the look of the 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM lens (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=149&modelid=7336).
I have the 50 1.4, and the 24-85.

All the 50mm Canon lenses are excelent, and IMHO everybody should have one of them. If you don't mind a slightly smaller aperture, consider the 50mm f/2.5 Macro. It falls between the 1.4 and the 1.8 in terms of price and quality, plus it lets you take macro shots. :)

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=45&sort=7&cat=2

My 24-85 is OK, but I wish I had something a little wider and a little faster. I'm considering a trade to a Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 Macro, but I've yet to try one.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=321&sort=7&cat=37

edit: Of course if you can mount EF-S lenses you should consider the Canon 17-85)

SolidxSnake

09-24-07, 10:57 PM

Speciale

09-24-07, 11:00 PM

I might actually get the 50mm f/2.5 A ring USM motor isn't too important to me, especially with a macro lens where I'll probably be manually-focusing anyway. I do want to focus on macro photography, so that'd be a great lens to have. What's the aperture range on that lens? It's listed as f/2.5, but there's gotta be more, no? I just read a review stating that it has apertures up to f/4, but does it go any higher?

That lens is suppose to be pretty solid actually. I don't do much macro work and prefer my primes to be faster then f/2...and USM of course. Thus, i've never had an interest.

That said, the lens should stop down to f/22 or so...

JCLW

09-24-07, 11:09 PM

f/32 IIRC.

SolidxSnake

09-25-07, 06:08 AM

Yeah, I would definitely get this lens over the f/1.4 if it was USM. Right now I'm still debating over both. I'll probably get the 50mm f/2.5 due to me having no real income (allowance + lunch money I don't spend).

For a zoom lens, the 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 USM looks like a good lens.

I can get EF-S lenses (20D supports them I know).

muddocktor

09-25-07, 06:47 AM

I think the Canon S3 SI 6mpx will have to be the compromise I can live with while in college.

I think this is going to be a higher priority than even a quad core processor. That and a couple of 500GB mirrored hard drives to store all my images on LOL.

I have this camera and I've been very satisfied with the picture quality and the features the camera offers, Audio. You can worse in it's price point. And there is one for sale in the Classies too right now (not mine). ;)

Audioaficionado

09-25-07, 09:37 AM

I have this camera and I've been very satisfied with the picture quality and the features the camera offers, Audio. You can worse in it's price point. And there is one for sale in the Classies too right now (not mine). ;)Yeah I saw that. But I think I'll just get it new at Newegg for a few bux more plus a free 1gig SD flash card.

Thanx for the confirmation of my decision on the camera.

Speciale

09-26-07, 05:52 PM

http://photos-b.ak.facebook.com/photos-ak-sctm/v126/236/6/14827881/n14827881_36448857_8396.jpg

Gotta take advantage of nice light...even if you're the only subject around.

SolidxSnake

09-26-07, 09:23 PM

Nice pic speciale. I've noticed not many photographers take pics of themselves :)

I just bid on a 20D body:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=120164251055&_trksid=p3907.m32&_trkparms=tab%3DBidding

It was at around 280 when I bid. My max is $430 ($450 total max with ship). Hopefully I win (got around 24 hrs 20 mins left).

IAmMoen

09-26-07, 09:52 PM

sorry snake. Doesnt look good unless you changed your max bid. Keep trying and you'll get that deal eventually.

SolidxSnake

09-26-07, 10:18 PM

sorry snake. Doesnt look good unless you changed your max bid. Keep trying and you'll get that deal eventually.

Yeah, noticed that. I found like 5-6 other auctions of the same idea (some have extras, some don't). I'm gonna bid on ones that have body, cap, batteries, and charger. Otherwise, no go.

I just bid on another one. It's at $265 right now, it's got around 24 hours left.

Cyrix_2k

09-26-07, 10:24 PM

Wow, 20D's are still worth that much? It gives me hope for my 350D, lol. It was kind of depressing when Sears clearanced them :(

SolidxSnake

09-26-07, 10:42 PM

Wow, 20D's are still worth that much? It gives me hope for my 350D, lol. It was kind of depressing when Sears clearanced them :(

20D's are great cameras still, I'd say it's better than the 400D in every way besides the sensor and AF. The 400D still goes for more than the 20D in most cases I've seen.

Edit: My current bid: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=280156653626&_trksid=p3907.m32&_trkparms=tab%3DBidding

JCLW

09-26-07, 10:54 PM

Good luck SolidxSnake.

I would possibly consider upgrading my 10D to a 40D, but not 'til the 50Ds are released and the 40Ds go on sale. :)

SolidxSnake

09-27-07, 12:05 AM

Well... that one is gone too.

A bit early anyway, supposed to be an x-mas present.

1cem4n

09-27-07, 12:41 AM

I used to have a 50 1.8 Nikkor but I sold it and bought the 1.4. Both are great lenses though.

do you notice a big difference between the two? i really want a high speed lense but i just don't know which one to pick.

MRD

09-27-07, 06:00 AM

They feel very different. The 1.4 is very heavy and has a HUGE amount of glass in it. Sharpness of the pics isn't different, but if you want to really blur the background with a big aperture or you are in a very low light situation, the extra 2/3 of a stop can matter sometimes.

If you're very tight on cash, I can definitely see going with the 1.8.

jcw122

09-28-07, 11:34 PM

Canon 350D user here

Other gear:
Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8
Canon 85mm f/1.8
Canon 580EX External Flash
Other Crap

SolidxSnake

10-02-07, 06:53 PM

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=140162523630

:D :D :D :D

Mine.

1cem4n

10-02-07, 07:00 PM

good find. the guy said he bought it 1.5 years ago so it's not that old.

SolidxSnake

10-05-07, 03:27 PM

Got in my 20D today ($500 with free express shipping). It came with the body, EFS 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 lens, and a 1GB lexar CF Card, battery, charger, manual, USB and video cable. Good stuff I gotta say. Love this camera already :)

SolidxSnake

10-07-07, 12:30 AM

A pic I took a bit ago, thought it would be pretty cool:

http://www.bostonrinkrats.com/solidxsnake/me20dsm.jpg

MRD

10-07-07, 12:38 AM

Either you reversed the image or the negative was printed upside down...

SolidxSnake

10-07-07, 08:28 AM

Either you reversed the image or the negative was printed upside down...

LOL!

Camacho111

10-07-07, 04:10 PM

I don't know guys but I demo a 40D at a new local BEST BUY. WOW thats camera is fast.

Whats weird was the kit lens (18-135mm) it came with...To zoom in you turn the ring left, to zoom out is right?

SolidxSnake

10-07-07, 08:30 PM

I don't know guys but I demo a 40D at a new local BEST BUY. WOW thats camera is fast.

Whats weird was the kit lens (18-135mm) it came with...To zoom in you turn the ring left, to zoom out is right?

Yep, that's how my 18-55 cheapo kit-lens is. Though I hate the "focus ring" on the kit lens... there's no actual ring, you rotate the front of the lens.

Camacho111

10-07-07, 10:05 PM

......I don't understand why that is......

I wanted to share an image set from a club Friday night. Most were MF. I need a body with a motor.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/camachojoey/sets/72157602295246579/

SolidxSnake

10-07-07, 10:53 PM

http://solidxsnake13224.deviantart.com/

That's my DeviantART profile, just put on a few pics. From now on all my pics go there.

Camacho111

10-25-07, 02:08 PM

http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=532736

masakabassist

11-04-07, 05:51 PM

I took this photo on my phone earlier on today, what do you lot think? Complete amateur by the way its of Bath Abbey :)

http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff108/masakabassist/th_BathAbbey.jpg (http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff108/masakabassist/BathAbbey.jpg)

SolidxSnake

11-04-07, 06:49 PM

Damn good picture from a phone I must say.

I have quite a few more pics on my DeviantArt... check em out (link in my previous post)!

Albaholic

11-11-07, 03:31 AM

Camacho111

11-11-07, 07:10 PM

Thats great, Fran!

My second DSLR should be arriving tomorrow. A D70!

Surfrider77

11-11-07, 07:26 PM

Just thought I would chime in here. I personally am not into the actual photography side of this, I unfortunately seem to fund my other half's hobby!! We have been buying a few odds and ends recently and I have been pretty involved in helping her dig through the net for gear and accessories.

She currently has a Canon Rebel XTi with a standard 28-300 Lens that she had with her older SLR. We do a lot of hiking and outdoors things so we were after a wide angle lens. This whole train-of-thought started a chain reaction of spending thats pretty staggering to say the least. (I had no idea gear cost this much!)

Ideally she would like a full frame sensor camera, but from what I see the Canon 5d is nearly two and a half years old and with the competition from Nikon, one would think it is due for replacement (MarkII) in the coming months or mid '08. So I think we will hold onto the XTi for now and buy the 5d replacement when its released.

We decided to purchase the EF-S 10-22mm USM lens. This should cover the WA shots until we can get a nice full frame body for the better EF lens equivalents. We also decided to pick up a nice piece of glass, the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM for her main lens. We got a chance to play with a friend's "L" lens over this past weekend and we were simply amazed how fast the glass was and the clarity / sharpness was just mind blowing.

We are also currently in the market for a ball head and tripod. As I said earlier, we hike and do outdoor stuff so weight / durability is critical. I am not sure who had mentioned earlier that the Gitzos were heavy, but thats just crazy. We ended up with 6X Carbon Fiber (2 series) Explorer legs. It holds up to 26lb of equip and weighs only 4lb! They dont come cheap, but they are simply incredible.

As for a ball head, we spent a lot of time choosing but I think we have narrowed it down to the Acratech GV2 ballhead (without clamp) and then going to purchase a quick release lever clamp and plate system from Really Right Stuff to mount on the GV2.

Anyone care to share thoughs / opinions on this primarily outdoor setup?

IAmMoen

11-12-07, 11:48 AM

I just took some pictures of my fiancees fun rowing regatta. You can see all the pictures here.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10988696@N03/

a little taste

http://www.cryo-laboratory.com/upload/./userfiles/iammoen/20071109_IMG_2189 copy.jpg

1cem4n

12-09-07, 01:42 AM

THREAD REVIVAL!!!!

so, I just got a Nikkor 18-200 VR in the mail. I got it for 550 dollars brand new! i love having hook ups! Here's a photo of it.

http://tn3-1.deviantart.com/fs22/300W/i/2007/342/5/b/Nikkor_18_200_Extended_by_3vilCrayon.jpg

itshondo

12-10-07, 10:08 AM

I use a Canon A630 8.0 MP digital for all of my photography needs including product reviews at my website.

http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/1240/a630pa6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

It takes great macros for those closeups-

http://klrworld.com/images/stories/product_reviews/WB_E2/E2_1g.jpg

http://klrworld.com/images/stories/product_reviews/happy_trails_shifter/e_toe.jpg

and scenics as well-

http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/5452/img1358yn8.jpg

Cyrix_2k

12-10-07, 12:38 PM

Audioaficionado

12-10-07, 02:59 PM

that's a great lens. I wish canon had an equivalent.Hehe... That thing IS a cannon LOL.

Albaholic

12-10-07, 03:55 PM

THREAD REVIVAL!!!!

so, I just got a Nikkor 18-200 VR in the mail. I got it for 550 dollars brand new! i love having hook ups! Here's a photo of it.

I paid near 2x that for mine :bang head great deal. Mind sharing your hookups? :beer: (longshot but i figure i'd try.)

SolidxSnake

12-10-07, 04:22 PM

Hehe... That thing IS a cannon LOL.

That thing's puny. Go find the Canon 1200mm f/5.6L USM. Now THAT is a cannon! :D

http://v.foto.radikal.ru/0703/00610cceadde.jpg

Yes, it's a real lens.

Audioaficionado

12-10-07, 06:05 PM

That thing's puny. Go find the Canon 1200mm f/5.6L USM. Now THAT is a cannon! :D

http://v.foto.radikal.ru/0703/00610cceadde.jpg

Yes, it's a real lens.It looks like it could find germs on Pluto LOL.

SolidxSnake

12-10-07, 06:19 PM

It looks like it could find germs on Pluto LOL.

No, that's Canon's 5200mm Mirror lens:

http://www.canonfd.com/mirrorlenses/images/page10.jpg

Again, that's a real lens. You also get a size comparison to the camera it's attached to! :D

1cem4n

12-10-07, 06:55 PM

haha, my dad's old friend owns a camera shop in hong kong.

Tc3 Toad

12-11-07, 02:54 PM

size isnt everything... lol, I love my nifty-fifty.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y72/Tc3Toad/IMG_0135.jpg

SolidxSnake

12-11-07, 09:52 PM

size isnt everything... lol, I love my nifty-fifty.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y72/Tc3Toad/IMG_0135.jpg

Same man, it's unbeatable at $70 new!

MRD

12-12-07, 05:42 AM

$70 new? A digital SLR? Huh? Where?

SolidxSnake

12-12-07, 06:03 AM

$70 new? A digital SLR? Huh? Where?

The nifty-fifty (Canon EF 50mm f/1.8) is roughly $70-$75 brand new. Not an SLR, the lens :D

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=search&A=search&Q=&ci=0&sb=ps&sq=desc&ac=&bsi=&shs=50+f%2F1.8&ci=8429&fakeSubmitButton=Submit+Query

Gray market = $69.95
USA = $74.95

MRD

12-12-07, 06:14 AM

Oh lol. That makes more sense. =P

1cem4n

12-12-07, 10:10 AM

i hate how the exact same thing for nikon cost 100 dollars. :(

MRD

12-12-07, 10:13 AM

I had the Nikon 1.8, but I sold it and bought the 1.4. I really like that lens.

Now I need a digital camera to put it on.

SolidxSnake

12-12-07, 02:12 PM

Just in today: EF 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 USM II. This lens is awesome! USM is domination :D Relatively fast for a consumer zoom, and the lens is built great as well. IQ is pretty damn good, and focusing is great. I have to go out and try this lens out a bit :D The range is great for a walkaround, though probably not wide enough for some on a crop body.

Albaholic

12-12-07, 03:47 PM

http://www.obsessionwithfire.com/pixelprod/images/20071111162127_20071110231520__dsc3803-edit-2.jpgI was bored so... here's one I took while I was in San Fran.
http://www.obsessionwithfire.com/pixelprod/images/20071110231520__dsc3803-edit-2.jpg

I was wondering what was your guys stance on photochopping pictures. I like this shot but you can see my friends head in the lower left hand corner. I thought about clone stamping him out but I did a bad job and decided I was better off leaving this image stock.

I had the Nikon 1.8, but I sold it and bought the 1.4. I really like that lens.

Now I need a digital camera to put it on.

I havent yet brought myself to spend the cash for the upgrade to the f/1.4 I've always wanted to.. but im kind of eyeing the 70-200 2.8 :eek:

eye of the hawk

12-12-07, 04:02 PM

I was wondering what was your guys stance on photochopping pictures. I like this shot but you can see my friends head in the lower left hand corner. I thought about clone stamping him out but I did a bad job and decided I was better off leaving this image stock.

What do you mean about "stance"? Photography is art, do what you want with it. The only time you shouldn't is when you are attempting to represent reality as accurately as possible and are to adhere to a code of ethics: IE Journalism.

From a photographers perspective though, i would say that the light post is far more distracting than your friend.

Albaholic

12-12-07, 04:14 PM

What do you mean about "stance"? Photography is art, do what you want with it. The only time you shouldn't is when you are attempting to represent reality as accurately as possible and are to adhere to a code of ethics: IE Journalism.

From a photographers perspective though, i would say that the light post is far more distracting than your friend.

I know some people who refuse to photochop their stuff trying to keep it as real as possible. Taking it only as far as cropping and color correction. I try to do the same. Some other people found that light post distracting as well. I shouldn't have a problem photoshopping it out. It didn't seem to distracting to me but I do think it would make for a much nicer picture without it.

SolidxSnake

12-12-07, 04:30 PM

Albaholic

12-12-07, 04:48 PM

Post-processing, IMO, is just as important for many photos as the actual photography is.

I know you can "post-process" film in the darkroom, so why not post-process digital images?

Whatever gives you the best final image in your opinion is fair game IMO.

Hmm I never thought of looking at it that way. I'll give it a shot when i get home from work tonight.

SolidxSnake

12-12-07, 04:53 PM

Again, though, it depends what you're doing. If you're going for the realistic images, ie photojournalism, then PP should be avoided. However, for artistic images, post-processing is fair game IMO.

Albaholic

12-12-07, 04:58 PM

Again, though, it depends what you're doing. If you're going for the realistic images, ie photojournalism, then PP should be avoided. However, for artistic images, post-processing is fair game IMO.

Well, I'm not doing it for photojournalism... just my own personal enjoyment.. I'd like to start printing my stuff and putting it up around the house.

eye of the hawk

12-12-07, 04:59 PM

I know some people who refuse to photochop their stuff trying to keep it as real as possible. Taking it only as far as cropping and color correction. I try to do the same. Some other people found that light post distracting as well. I shouldn't have a problem photoshopping it out. It didn't seem to distracting to me but I do think it would make for a much nicer picture without it.

People who tell you that have likely never worked in a darkroom. There is little in photoshop you can do that you couldn't do in a dark room or to the camera itself (ie, filters). The only exception i can think of is cloning, but even that could be done in some manner in a dark room if you're clever enough.

I love shooting film and i miss my days working in a darkroom but the truth is that photography has evolved. There is little reason not to evolve with it. When the first photographers began to flaunt what they were doing, many artists worried that it would make painting obsolete. As far as i know, painters are still around and doing just fine.

Really, if all you're doing is making art, then do what you want. The only thing to keep in mind is that you should try to avoid it, not because of some sort of list of ethics, but because ultimately your photos will be better if you get the picture right in the camera rather than on the computer.

Get rid of the ugly dude :beer:

eye of the hawk

12-12-07, 05:00 PM

Again, though, it depends what you're doing. If you're going for the realistic images, ie photojournalism, then PP should be avoided. However, for artistic images, post-processing is fair game IMO.

Just to clairfy, there are some generally accepted processes that are "allowed" in photojournalism.

Any adjustment of exposure, color, contrast, sharpness, cropping...these are the things that you can do. Again though, these are the only things you could do in a darkroom in the days of film.

Illah

12-12-07, 05:07 PM

How did I never notice this thread?

And I agree re: Photoshop - it's a tool, use it wisely. Ansel Adams spent a LOT of time in the darkroom processing his shots to get his pictures, and so do most great photographers. There's a difference between art and journalism.

Anyway, here's my camerabag setup:

Nikon D50
Tamron 17-55mm f2.8
Nikon 70-300mm
SB-600 Speedlight (flash)
Lumiquest diffuser
Rubber bands and index card for on-flash bounce
Calumet premium polarizer
2GB of storage

We also have a Canon S200 for point-and-shoot when the Nikon is overkill.

My not-updated-enough Flickr page (lots of stuff I haven't uploaded yet):

http://www.flickr.com/photos/39251909@N00/

And lots of concert / event / club photos here (taken by me or my wife):

http://gallery.grooveeffect.com/

--Illah

Albaholic

12-12-07, 05:16 PM

ultimately your photos will be better if you get the picture right in the camera rather than on the computer.

Get rid of the ugly dude :beer:

That's my ultimate goal. I'd like to get things right in the camera. for that shot though I dont think i could have got that shot without the lightpole in it because of the WA lens. I really don't want to use PS as a crutch.

IAmMoen

12-14-07, 10:52 PM

I was wondering what was your guys stance on photochopping pictures. I like this shot but you can see my friends head in the lower left hand corner. I thought about clone stamping him out but I did a bad job and decided I was better off leaving this image stock.

I havent yet brought myself to spend the cash for the upgrade to the f/1.4 I've always wanted to.. but im kind of eyeing the 70-200 2.8 :eek:

I have the canon 70-200 2.8L. Great lens. BUT. You better have a really good reason to buy it. Right now it is sitting over in my bag taking up space because it isn't summer and it is 7F here. Just saying. I use my 10-22mm canon a lot more and it takes some really cool pictures for 1/2 the price. It is all about what you are needing/wanting to take pictures of. Don't buy it just to have it.

eye of the hawk

12-14-07, 10:56 PM

SolidxSnake

12-15-07, 11:55 AM

I'm not really sure why you're comparing a 70-200 and a 10-22...

Same...

I guess his point is to pick lenses that fit your shooting style, not because of their popularity?

Albaholic

12-15-07, 04:27 PM

I have the canon 70-200 2.8L. Great lens. BUT. You better have a really good reason to buy it. Right now it is sitting over in my bag taking up space because it isn't summer and it is 7F here. Just saying. I use my 10-22mm canon a lot more and it takes some really cool pictures for 1/2 the price. It is all about what you are needing/wanting to take pictures of. Don't buy it just to have it.

I shoot with Nikon. I already have the 10-20mm sigma (wonderful very fun lens). I've demo'd the 70-200 and I think it would be great to take some surf pics with (I'd love a 500 or 600mm lens but thats not happening.) I think the 70-200 with a TC will have to do. I planning on moving to the mainland next year so I'd like to document the islands as much as possible before I go.

IAmMoen

12-16-07, 03:13 PM

Same...

I guess his point is to pick lenses that fit your shooting style, not because of their popularity?

Exactly right. Don't pick it because it is big or looks cool or is popular. You need to look at what you will be shooting and decide on it. Alba has a very good reason to want it. Plus he already has the other type.

The other reason I mention both of them is that if you are trying to grow your lens selection and you don't have both of them you might want to consider one before the other, again based on your shooting needs.

@alba Good luck with your surfing pictures. Remember that a tc brings down your light a stop (I am sure you are aware). Look forward to seeing some of the pictures. :beer:

Albaholic

12-16-07, 08:04 PM

Exactly right. Don't pick it because it is big or looks cool or is popular. You need to look at what you will be shooting and decide on it. Alba has a very good reason to want it. Plus he already has the other type.

The other reason I mention both of them is that if you are trying to grow your lens selection and you don't have both of them you might want to consider one before the other, again based on your shooting needs.

@alba Good luck with your surfing pictures. Remember that a tc brings down your light a stop (I am sure you are aware). Look forward to seeing some of the pictures. :beer:

I've got my wide end covered so im looking for that bit of reach. I do know that TC's will stop me down a bit. But I'm a long long way away from being able to afford that lens anyway. I may look into renting it for a week or 2 (and hope i don't fall in love with it)

And thanks... I'll be sure to share results with you guys. Too bad I just missed out one of this winter's surf competitions

MRD

12-16-07, 08:45 PM

The rule is simple... multiply the fstop by the magnification on the teleconverter.

So if you're lens is f/4, and you have a 2x teleconverter, you'll have an f/8 lens. If you have an f/4 lens and you use a 1.4x teleconverter, you have an f/5.6 lens. That's why they come in 1.4 and 2.0 usually... because those are 1 and 2 stops (stops are multiples of 1.4 if you look at the progression, which makes sense, because if the radius of the hole is multiplied by 1.4, the amount of light is 1.4^2 (area of the circle) which is 2x, so a stop is 2x the amount of light).

SolidxSnake

12-16-07, 08:55 PM

Albaholic

12-16-07, 08:56 PM

LOL MRD how long does it take you to throw down all that math.. I'm too tired from work to even look at numbers . :)

eye of the hawk

12-16-07, 09:12 PM

LOL MRD how long does it take you to throw down all that math.. I'm too tired from work to even look at numbers . :)

It doesn't really require math, after a while it becomes very standard

1.4= 1 stop, 2=2 stops

i know that 4->5.6 is 1 stop
i know that 4->8 is 2

I know that 1.4-2 is 1 stop
and 2->2.8 is one stop

i didn't even have to crunch numbers, you do this stuff long enough and its just second nature.

SolidxSnake

12-16-07, 09:20 PM

It doesn't really require math, after a while it becomes very standard

1.4= 1 stop, 2=2 stops

Er... what?

eye of the hawk

12-16-07, 09:30 PM

Er... what?

ISO
Shutter Speed
f/stop

ISO: 1 stop= double (or half). E.g. ISO 200. One stop less is ISO 100, one stop more is ISO 200

Shutter Speed: 1 stop = double (or half). E.g. 1/100. One stop less is 1/50, one stop more is 1/200

f/stop: 1 stop= 1.4, 2 stops=2. E.g. 200mm f/2.8 lens. One stop more is f/4, two stops more is f/5.6.

f/stop is the ratio of the opening of the lens to the length of the lens.

If a 50mm lens has an opening 50mm wide it is an f/1 lens. Lets add a 1.4 teleconverter to that lens. The lens is now 50x1.4 focal length, this comes to 70mm. The opening of the lens is still 50mm wide. Thus the f/stop is 70/50 or 1.4.

f/1 to f/1.4=1 stop

Lets pretend we added a 2x teleconvertor to that 50mm lens. It is now 50x2 or 100mm long but the opening is still only 50mm wide. Thus, the f/stop is now f/2

make sense?

**EDIT**

1.4*1.4=1.96...you round up.

IAmMoen

12-16-07, 09:38 PM

Er... what?

I think he was referring to the aforementioned teleconverters.

MRD

12-16-07, 11:28 PM

Stops are the powers of sqrt(2). 1, 1.4, 2, 2.8, 4, etc. Not multiples of 1.4 (1.4, 2.8, 4.2, 5.6, etc).

Yes, sorry, misspoke... they are powers of 1.4 (or more precisely, sqrt (2)), not multiples.

Alba, I'm a mathematician. I remember sitting in my photo class when I was 15 and being told there was no pattern to the fstops... and figuring out of course that there was, which saved me from having to memorize them.

Everything in photography is measured in stops, which are doubling or halving of light exposure. Three things affect it. Aperture (1.4, 2.0, 2.8, etc... each is twice or half the light), shutter speeds (1/500, 1/250, 1/125, 1/60, etc.... also twice or half the light) and film ISO, (100, 200, 400 etc... doubling or halving changes exposure by 1/2 or 2).

It's designed that way so you can easily compensate. You know if ISO 100 film will be properly exposed at 1/125 of a sec at f/4, then ISO 200 film will be properly exposed at 1/60 at f/8. It's all about understanding the relationships of those 3 numbers, and you get fast at it.

My Nikon has a nice shiftable program mode, where the thumb wheel cycles through all the combos of aperture and shutter speed, changing them to offset each other and maintain the right exposure.